Coronavirus hype biggest political hoax in history - OPINION

  

Category:  Op/Ed

Via:  1stwarrior  •  5 months ago  •  120 comments

Coronavirus hype biggest political hoax in history - OPINION

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



ANALYSIS/OPINION:

The new coronavirus is real.

The response to the coronavirus is hyped. And in time, this hype will be revealed as politically hoaxed.

In fact, COVID-19 will go down as one of the political world’s biggest, most shamefully overblown, overhyped, overly and irrationally inflated and outright deceptively flawed responses to a health matter in American history, one that was carried largely on the lips of medical professionals who have no business running a national economy or government.

The facts are this: COVID-19 is a real disease that sickens some, proves fatal to others, mostly the elderly — and does nothing to the vast majority.

That’s it.

That, in a nutshell, is it.

Or, in the words of   Dan Erickson   and Artin Massih, doctors and co-owners of Accelerated Urgent Care in Bakersfield, California: Let’s get the country reopened — and now.

“Do we need to still shelter in place? Our answer is emphatically no. Do we need businesses to be shut down? Emphatically no. … [T]he data is showing it’s time to lift,”   Erickson   said , in a recent interview.

He’s right. They’re right.

The data to keep America closed and Americans closed in simply doesn’t exist.

If truth be told, it’s questionable it ever did.

The scientists leading the coronavirus shutdown charge predicted in March that in America, between 100,000 and 250,000 would die. They based those estimates on computer modeling.

But at the same time they were basing those estimates on computer modeling, they were acknowledging that computer   modeling   is inaccurate and errs on the side of hype.

“I’ve never seen a model of the diseases I’ve dealt with where the worst-case actually came out,”   said   Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a member of President Donald Trump’s White House coronavirus task force, during a CNN interview in March. “They always overshoot.”

Catch that? Fauci’s message: Computer models are flawed and inaccurate and always overestimate the problem.

But from these faulty overinflated computer figures came all the constitutionally questionable actions by government anyway — from ordering businesses closed to quarantining-slash-house arresting American citizens to doing some quick and pitiful and economically painful income redistribution schemes via stimulus funds’ legislation.

Since, about 56,000 have died in America due to coronavirus — or have they? Again, the facts are flimsy.

Government ordered hospitals weeks ago to stop performing elective surgeries to make way for the projected numbers of coronavirus patients. So they did. And in so doing, they cut off their revenue streams. So Congress passed legislation giving hospitals billions of dollars to treat coronavirus patients. Conflict of interest? Yikes. Yes.

The coronavirus counts, already flawed from computer modeling, were then given another flaw treatment.

“[Pennsylvania] removes more than 200 deaths from official coronavirus count as questions mount about reporting process, data accuracy,” The Inquirer   reported .

Add to that the ever-changing nature of a virus that spreads by air and contact, and honestly, suddenly, even expert Fauci’s best guess is about as good as Joe Neighbor’s best guess. So that leaves common sense, combined with knowledge of past viruses, to guide.

But the quote-unquote medical experts refused to go there, refused to acknowledge common sense, refused to compare with past viruses in any way that didn’t hype the coronavirus counts.

This virus was different, Americans were told. This virus was far more contagious than anything ever before seen or studied, Americans were told. And any time the case counts dropped off and the numbers proved wrong, well, this was due to the social distancing and quarantining and face-mask wearing that Americans had been doing, by government’s order — Americans were told.

It just didn’t make sense.

It just doesn’t add up.

It just didn’t, and doesn’t, justify the utter shredding of civil rights.

And now some in the medical community, thank goodness, are   starting   to point out the glaring omissions of logic and fact that have plagued this overhyped, overreaching coronavirus crackdown that has stretched on far, far too long.

Among some of   Erickson ’s remarks: “This is immunology — microbiology 101. This is the basis of what we’ve known for years: When you   take   human beings and you say, ‘Go into your house, clean all your counters, Lysol them down’ … what does it do to our immune system? … Sheltering in place decreases your immune system.”

And this: “Any time you have something new in the [medical] community, it sparks fear — and I would have done what Dr. Fauci did … initially. … But you know, looking at theories and models — which is what these folks use — is very different than the way the actual virus presents itself throughout communities.”

And this: “Do you think you’re protected from COVID when you wear gloves that transfer disease everywhere? … We wear masks in an acute setting to protect us. [But] we’re not wearing masks. Why is that? Because we understand microbiology. We understand immunology. And we want strong immune systems. I don’t want to hide in my home, develop a weak immune system and then come out and get disease.”

And this: “When I’m writing up my death report I’m being pressured to add COVID. Why is that? Why are we being pressured to add COVID? To maybe increase the numbers, and make it look a little bit worse than it is. We’re being pressured in-house to add COVID to the diagnostic list when we think it has nothing to do with the actual cause of death. The actual cause of death was not COVID, but it’s being reported as one of the diseases processes. … COVID didn’t kill them, 25 years of tobacco use killed.”

Does it get any clearer than that?

Seriously, America. The only reason America is still in shutdown mode is political.

Either politicians are too afraid to make any move that might come back to bite them politically or politicians are using this coronavirus to political advantage — to, say, pass gun control laws, like Virginia’s governor, Ralph Northam. Or to, say, float campaign hopes on the current ravaged economy, like former Vice President Joe Biden and oh, all the Democrats facing races.

But for the rest of America — the rest of hardworking, freedom-loving America — it’s time to reel in the radically unconstitutional.

“If you’re going to dance on someone’s constitutional rights, you better have a good reason — you better have a really good reason, not just a theory,”   Erickson   said. “The data is showing us it’s time to lift … so if we don’t lift, what is the reason?”

That is the key question.

As time goes by, the answer will only become more and more evident. The coronavirus may be real — but the hype is hoaxed. Now let’s just hope this is a one-time hoax that doesn’t roll around every time flu season approaches.


Article is LOCKED by author/seeder
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
1stwarrior
1  seeder  1stwarrior    5 months ago

The data to keep America closed and Americans closed in simply doesn’t exist.

If truth be told, it’s questionable it ever did.

The scientists leading the coronavirus shutdown charge predicted in March that in America, between 100,000 and 250,000 would die. They based those estimates on computer modeling.

But at the same time they were basing those estimates on computer modeling, they were acknowledging that computer    modeling    is inaccurate and errs on the side of hype.

“I’ve never seen a model of the diseases I’ve dealt with where the worst-case actually came out,”    said    Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and a member of President Donald Trump’s White House coronavirus task force, during a CNN interview in March. “They always overshoot.”

Catch that? Fauci’s message: Computer models are flawed and inaccurate and always overestimate the problem.

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1  Gordy327  replied to  1stwarrior @1    5 months ago

Better to overestimate than underestimate. 

 
 
 
Greg Jones
1.1.1  Greg Jones  replied to  Gordy327 @1.1    5 months ago

But is it better to fear monger and attempt to induce panic, rather than use science, logic, and common sense in considering the problem.

 
 
 
Gordy327
1.1.2  Gordy327  replied to  Greg Jones @1.1.1    5 months ago
But is it better to fear monger and attempt to induce panic, rather than use science, logic, and common sense in considering the problem.

If people are panicked, that's because they're the ones being irrational rather than using logic or common sense. Scientists actually deal with diseases. But they also need to know the potential severity and inform people as to the best ways to avoid being infected.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.2  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @1    5 months ago
Catch that? Fauci’s message: Computer models are flawed and inaccurate and always overestimate the problem.
Sadly, like all too many here, you hang your hat on a truncated quote by the author of a partisan rag. You and the author are misrepresenting what Fauci said. 
From the link to the Fauci interview:
"Whenever the models come in, they give a worst-case scenario and a best-case scenario. Generally, the reality is somewhere in the middle. I've never seen a model of the diseases that I've dealt with where the worst case actually came out. They always overshoot," Dr. Anthony Fauci, a key member of the White House's coronavirus task force, told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union."
"I mean, looking at what we're seeing now, you know, I would say between 100 and 200,000 (deaths). But I don't want to be held to that, " he said, adding that the US is going to have "millions of cases."
So you see, Fauci didn't say that computer models are flawed and inaccurate. Not even close. 
 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.2.1  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Dulay @1.2    5 months ago

Whenever the models come in, -

I've never seen a model of the diseases - computer models.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.2.2  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @1.2.1    5 months ago

What will your next truncation of Fauci's comment look like? 

Fauci and Dirx RELY on computer models. They've presented images of them during their briefings and they've actually cited the IMHE website. Just stop. 

http://www.healthdata.org/covid

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.2.3  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Dulay @1.2.2    5 months ago

Interpretation - perception - ya oughta try'm.

 
 
 
Dulay
1.2.4  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @1.2.3    5 months ago

Facts - cogency - ya oughta try'm. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
1.2.5  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Dulay @1.2.4    5 months ago

So, as usual, you have no discussion - just jab and run.

Sad.

 
 
 
Freedom Warrior
2  Freedom Warrior    5 months ago

It was revealed to me yesterday why hospitals are listing Covid-19 as the reason for death in many cases where the co-morbidity was the primary reason.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

 
 
 
Gordy327
2.1  Gordy327  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2    5 months ago
It was revealed to me yesterday why hospitals are listing Covid-19 as the reason for death in many cases where the co-morbidity was the primary reason.

Covid can exasperate the health problems people with comorbidities have. Think of Covid as the proverbial tipping point. But hospitals do cite death by Covid and death by other causes associated with Covid, such as pneumonia.

 
 
 
Jasper2529
2.2  Jasper2529  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2    5 months ago
It was revealed to me yesterday why hospitals are listing Covid-19 as the reason for death in many cases where the co-morbidity was the primary reason. $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

https://www.apalachtimes.com/news/20200425/fact-check-hospitals-get-paid-more-if-patients-listed-as-covid-19-on-ventilators

https://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/20200428/coronavirus-fact-check-hospitals-get-paid-more-if-patients-listed-as-covid-19-on-ventilators

https://www.foxnews.com/health/hospitals-medicare-patients-cost-coronavirus

If you're interested, there are more links.

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.2.1  Split Personality  replied to  Jasper2529 @2.2    5 months ago

Mortality rates of COVID patients put on ventilators are dismal, estimates seems to agree that only 12-14% will survive this last ditch chance for the patient.

Because this disease has become so partisan, one can now find rates reported from 25% to 97% depending on who is arguing what.

Instead of inferring that hospitals are taking advantage of the system, why aren't we asking who wrote the legislation favoring the increases for ventilator cases?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/04/24/fact-check-medicare-hospitals-paid-more-covid-19-patients-coronavirus/3000638001/

What's False

However, Medicare says it does not make standard, one-size-fits-all payments to hospitals for patients admitted with COVID-19 diagnoses and placed on ventilators. The $13,000 and $39,000 figures appear to be based on generic industry estimates for admitting and treating patients with similar conditions.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/medicare-hospitals-covid-patients/

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.3  Split Personality  replied to  Freedom Warrior @2    5 months ago
Ask FactCheck weighed in  April 21: "The figures cited by Jensen generally square with estimated Medicare payments for COVID-19 hospitalizations, based on average Medicare payments for patients with similar diagnoses."

Ask FactCheck reporter Angelo Fichera, who interviewed Jensen, noted, "Jensen said he did not think that hospitals were intentionally misclassifying cases for financial reasons. But that’s how his comments have been widely interpreted and paraded on social media."

Ask FactCheck's conclusion: "Recent legislation pays hospitals higher Medicare rates for COVID-19 patients and treatment, but there is no evidence of fraudulent reporting."

Julie Aultman, a member of the editorial board of the American Medical Association’s Journal of Ethics, told PolitiFact it is “very unlikely that physicians or hospitals will falsify data or be motivated by money to do so.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/04/24/fact-check-medicare-hospitals-paid-more-covid-19-patients-coronavirus/3000638001/
 
 
 
1stwarrior
2.3.1  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Split Personality @2.3    5 months ago

Who is eligible for Medicare? Generally, Medicare is available for people age 65 or older, younger people with disabilities and people with End Stage Renal Disease (permanent kidney failure requiring dialysis or transplant). Medicare has two parts, Part A (Hospital Insurance) and Part B (Medicare Insurance).

So, let's do the old apples and oranges comparisons, eh?

You like to post disputing information, so how 'bout posting information on payments made for folks NOT ON MEDICARE, i.e. not over 65, not young people disabilities, not people with end stage renal disease.

Can ya do that?

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.3.2  Split Personality  replied to  1stwarrior @2.3.1    5 months ago
Can ya do that?

Why would I?

FW implied here and elsewhere that there is a monetary reason to report COVID as the cause of death.

Jasper concurred with anecdotal "evidence" that Medicare in some cases pays more when a Medicare patient is ventilated.

I responded accordingly.

Now having said that, depending on the tables you use, fully 88-90% of all COVID deaths are Medicare age eligible so the concern about medicare fraud is worthy of discussion but hardly a given.

This data is only for the first 44,016 deaths, but the pattern continues.

https://data.cdc.gov/NCHS/Provisional-COVID-19-Death-Counts-by-Sex-Age-and-S/9bhg-hcku

Given what I know about Medicare, I am certain that from a fiscal pov, all hospitals would rather treat

patients on "standard" medical insurance OTHER than Medicare negotiated rates because they can still charge the patient or the estate for non covered items or procedures unlike Medicare.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
3  Paula Bartholomew    5 months ago

Banana oil.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
3.1  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @3    5 months ago

Not good for going down hill either.

 
 
 
Release The Kraken
4  Release The Kraken    5 months ago

Tough call. The Russia hoax went on for three years and we have a few people living in mental isolation that flock to this site and continue to promote the debunked myth.

This may eclipse it, we shall see. Once again the hold over corrupt beurocrats will be the focus of out current disaster.

We may need to construct a new federal facility for treason

 
 
 
Jasper2529
5  Jasper2529    5 months ago

Many scientists and physicians have stated that the oft-quoted computer models don't factor in mitigation.

Another interesting detail is that many reports about testing and deaths are counted like this: 

  • 1 person tested positive 3 times and eventually died; therefore, 3 people "died" 
 
 
 
MUVA
5.1  MUVA  replied to  Jasper2529 @5    5 months ago

I think is nine according to some the left.

 
 
 
MAGA
5.1.1  MAGA  replied to  MUVA @5.1    5 months ago

This is a great article. I saw it or one like it last night.  Im grateful that this valuable information is getting out to the general public.  

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6  Perrie Halpern R.A.    5 months ago

This article is dangerous and you by spreading it you are endangering the public welfare. 

 
 
 
Release The Kraken
6.1  Release The Kraken  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6    5 months ago

The article is dangerous?

Actually the lockdown may turn out to be dangerous. 

We are going back to work. States can choose for themselves and they have to live with their decisions.

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.1.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  Release The Kraken @6.1    5 months ago

The choice between putting food on the table or losing a loved one is never easy. Still, ignoring medical facts is dangerous. I do think that states have to make this decision for themselves, but if it backfires on them, I don't want them reinfecting my state. We are trying to open safely. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
6.1.2  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.1.1    5 months ago

Perrie - that's just it - THERE ARE FEW IF ANY MEDICAL FACTS about the Covid-19 - there are 8, and possibly more, strains and the SCIENTISTS don't have a handle on any of them.  A cure???? sure, maybe in 4, 6, 8, 12, 24, 36 months according to the COMPUTER MODELS - but not according to the labs conducting the testing.  The labs are doing what good scientists do - they test, test, test, test, test, test until they have a winner (most of the time),  But they, the labs, WILL NOT put something out there that is half-azz.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.3  Split Personality  replied to  1stwarrior @6.1.2    5 months ago
  But they, the labs, WILL NOT put something out there that is half-azz.

Like HCQ?

 
 
 
1stwarrior
6.1.4  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.3    5 months ago

And HCQ is what?  Fish cleaning tablets?

 
 
 
Gordy327
6.1.5  Gordy327  replied to  Release The Kraken @6.1    5 months ago
Actually the lockdown may turn out to be dangerous. 

Only for those who violate it.

 States can choose for themselves and they have to live with their decisions.

Why should those who actually follow quarantining and distancing protocols be put at risk because of another's poor decisions?

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.6  Split Personality  replied to  1stwarrior @6.1.4    5 months ago

Hydroxychloroquinine.

Why the hostility today?

 
 
 
1stwarrior
6.1.7  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.6    5 months ago

Seriously?  Didn't know what HCQ was.  Way too damn many initials thingys floating around - hard to keep up with them.

No hostility - just looking for straight discussion without side issues busting out - such as your "mention" of the Medicare thing - I'd be interested in what Mutual, BC/BS, Travelers, Penn Life, etc. have to say on what their payments have been and to whom.  Out of all the insurance payors, Medicare is a supplement, not a primary in most cases.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.8  Split Personality  replied to  1stwarrior @6.1.7    5 months ago
such as your "mention" of the Medicare thing -

Already pointed out that someone else gets credit for introducing Medicare to the discussion.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
6.1.9  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.8    5 months ago

No, I understand that - but - I guess from your three responses mentioning Medicare, I kinda thought you might also be interested in seeing what the primary insurers are doing.

I know that, here in NM, Medicare will pay more that a primary will in many cases - why?  Haven't the foggiest idea.

 
 
 
MAGA
6.1.10  MAGA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.1.1    5 months ago

What state isn’t trying to re open safely?  Who sets the criteria as to what is safely reopening?  

 
 
 
MAGA
6.1.11  MAGA  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.3    5 months ago

HCQ has been around for 70 years or so.  If used early it does seem to reduce both the severity of the Wuhan affliction and the duration of it.  

 
 
 
MAGA
6.1.12  MAGA  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.6    5 months ago

Attacking the use of hydroxychloroquinine is the hostility today.  

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.13  Split Personality  replied to  MAGA @6.1.11    5 months ago

Bloodletting was around for 3000 years, that doesn't mean it was beneficial, but those who survived it may have thought it was beneficial if it didn't kill them.

Key word is "seems".

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
6.1.14  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  1stwarrior @6.1.2    5 months ago

Please show me these facts. Right now according to Johns Hopkins there are two variations of the disease, the Chinese and the Italian. Both have the same basic structure and both have the same outer coating, which means that it is easy to target. 

So I am not sure what you are talking about computer models. 

 
 
 
1stwarrior
6.1.15  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.1.14    5 months ago

Coronavirus Latest: New University Of Penn Model Predicts 350,000 Deaths By End Of June If All States Fully Reopen

https://philadelphia.cbslocal.com/2020/05/05/coronavirus-latest-new-university-of-penn-model-predicts-350000-deaths-by-end-of-june-if-all-states-fully-reopen/

Governors in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware have a lot to consider before fully reopening. If they open too quickly, that could result in more deaths, according to a new model from the Wharton School at the University Of Pennsylvania.

Scientists have divided coronaviruses into four sub-groupings, called alpha, beta, gamma, and delta. Seven of these viruses can infect people. The four common ones are:

  • 229E (alpha)
  • NL63 (alpha)
  • OC43 (beta)
  • HKU1 (beta)

The three less-common ones are:

  • MERS-CoV, a beta virus that causes Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS)
  • SARS-CoV, a beta virus that causes severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)
  • SARS-CoV-2, which causes COVID-19

As the coronavirus keeps spreading around the world, it will probably keep changing. Experts may find new strains. It’s impossible to predict how those virus changes might affect what happens. But change is just what viruses do.

 
 
 
Dulay
6.1.16  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @6.1.15    5 months ago

1st, you said:

THERE ARE FEW IF ANY MEDICAL FACTS about the Covid-19 - there are 8, and possibly more, strains and the SCIENTISTS don't have a handle on any of them.

Then you quote [without posting the link] a WebMD article that gives a layman explanation of the main strains of Coronaviruses which makes it pretty clear that SCIENTISTS DO have a handle on ALL of them. Do they have a cure for them all? NO. But they sure as hell know a hell of a lot of FACTS about them. Hell, the mere fact that they can differentiate them on the molecular level proves that. 

BTW, here's the link to the WebMD article for copyright purposes. 

https://www.webmd.com/lung/coronavirus-strains#1

 
 
 
1stwarrior
6.1.17  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Dulay @6.1.16    5 months ago

Thanks - thought I had included it.

 
 
 
Thomas
6.1.18  Thomas  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6.1.14    5 months ago

I don't know about variations, but it has been reported that it mutates at a predictable rate and from this they can determine from where the virus came, if it is "New" and how distant it is from all of the others.... Isn't crisper wonderful?!

Link

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.19  Sparty On  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.13    5 months ago
Bloodletting was around for 3000 years, that doesn't mean it was beneficial,

This is the type of disingenuous hyperbole that contributes nothing to the discussion.  

Big difference in medicine between the two (70 years ago vs thousands of years ago) wouldn't you say SP?  

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.20  Split Personality  replied to  Sparty On @6.1.19    5 months ago

Versus thousands of years ago?

That's exactly why it is not disingenuous.  Blood letting persisted through the 1800's here and in Europe.

it has been mostly phased out of modern American medicine with three or four caveats.

Bloodletting today
Today phlebotomy therapy is primarily used in Western medicine for a few conditions such as hemochromatosis, polycythemia vera, and porphyria cutanea tarda.[ 11 ]

Hemochromatosis is a genetic disorder of iron metabolism leading to abnormal iron accumulation in liver, pancreas, heart, pituitary, joints, and skin. It is treated with periodic phlebotomy to maintain ferritin levels at a reasonable level so as to minimize further iron deposition.

Polycythemia vera is a stem cell bone marrow disorder leading to overproduction of red blood cells and variable overproduction of white blood cells and platelets. Its treatment includes phlebotomy to reduce the red blood cell mass and decrease the chance of dangerous clots.

Porphyria cutanea tarda is a group of disorders of heme metabolism with an associated abnormality in iron metabolism. Phlebotomy is also used to decrease iron levels and prevent accumulation in various organs.

But the largest modern usage of bloodletting is leach therapy.

In the last 25 years leech therapy has made a comeback in the area of microsurgery and reimplantation sur­gery. Hirudo medicinalis can secrete several biologically active substances including hyaluronidase, fibrinase, proteinase inhibitors, and hirudin, an anticoagulant.

The leech can help reduce venous congestion and prevent tissue necrosis. In this way it can be used in the postoperative care of skin grafts and reimplanted fingers, ears, and toes. Because of concern regarding second­ary infections a “mechanical leech” has been developed at the University of Wisconsin.[ 12 ]

https://www.bcmj.org/premise/history-bloodletting
 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.21  Sparty On  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.20    5 months ago

We aren't talking about any of those treatments.   We are talking about treating a virus.

Using a 3000 year old example as a comparison to a 70 year old example IS disingenuous as hell.

Bloodletting has absolutely no connection to this discussion.    Unless of course you can share with us any reliable sources that have suggested bloodletting to treat this Corona virus.

No?   Well there are reliable sources who have been studying the 70 year old technology for viability.

Do you have some concrete proof that it can't or won't ever help treat Covid-19 in some beneficial manner?

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.1.22  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Sparty On @6.1.21    5 months ago
Using a 3000 year old example as a comparison to a 70 year old example IS disingenuous as hell.

Not at all, his point is quite valid.

Bloodletting has absolutely no connection to this discussion.

Bloodletting was thought to be a cure to many ailments for thousands of years (much longer than HCQ has been used) thus proving the length of time something has been in use doesn't actually increase the likelihood it's safe or effective.

When someone erroneously claimed " HCQ has been around for 70 years or so." their obvious point was that somehow, because it had been around a while, that proved it safe and effective. This is a bullshit moronic narrative and does not in any way prove HCQ safe or effective.

Then they said:

If used early it does seem to reduce both the severity of the Wuhan affliction and the duration of it.

This is a complete lie based on the most ignorant President in history's worthless opinion not based on any facts.

"A small trial finds that hydroxychloroquine is not effective for treating coronavirus"

https://theconversation.com/a-small-trial-finds-that-hydroxychloroquine-is-not-effective-for-treating-coronavirus-135484

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2020/04/24/covid-19-treatment-fda-says-hydroxychloroquine-not-safe-effective/3020046001/

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/no-miraculous-recovery-some-icu-doctors-say-hydroxychloroquine-isn-t-n1177556

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.23  Sparty On  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.1.22    5 months ago
When someone erroneously claimed " HCQ has been around for 70 years or so." their obvious point was that somehow, because it had been around a while, that proved it safe and effective. This is a bullshit moronic narrative and does not in any way prove HCQ safe or effective.

Well, that's a nice deflection but not what i saying at all.   Show me where i've ever said HCQ is a viable treatment for this virus.   I'll save you some time, i never did.

I did however point out the ridiculous comparison of a 3000 year old technology that isn't even being considered by any serious source with a 70 year old (or however old it is) technology that has been studied and is still being studied for Covid-19 treatment.

You two can keep rationalizing that its a reasonable comparison to make but it is not IMO.   Nothing irrational about HCQ in this Covid-19 discussion.  

Nothing at all.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.24  Split Personality  replied to  Sparty On @6.1.21    5 months ago
Using a 3000 year old example as a comparison to a 70 year old example IS disingenuous as hell.

Repeating that statement is the only thing disingenuous I see.

Do you have some concrete proof that it can't or won't help treat Covid-19 in some beneficial manner?

Do you have concrete proof it works?  That it isn't just a placebo effect?

If I took HCQ for malaria (I do not) and I never get the virus, what does it prove?

Absolutely nothing. 

The malaria drug showed no benefit in a relatively large trial of its use at US veterans hospitals.

An analysis showed that nearly a third of veterans at US military hospitals died when treated with hydroxychloroquine, a greater fraction than patients who received standard treatment.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/apr/22/trump-hydroxychloroquine-study-coronavirus

FDA issues warnings on chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine after deaths and poisonings reported

Published Fri, Apr 24 2020 10:06 AM EDT Updated Fri, Apr 24 2020 6:11 PM EDT
Key Points
  • The agency also said it became aware of reports of “serious heart rhythm problems” in patients with the virus who were treated with the malaria drugs.
  • It said patients taking the drugs for approved reasons, including malaria or to treat autoimmune conditions like lupus, should continue taking their medicine as prescribed.

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/04/24/fda-issues-warnings-on-chloroquine-and-hydroxychloroquine-after-serious-poisoning-and-death-reported.html

FDA cautions against use of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine for COVID-19 outside of the hospital setting or a clinical trial due to risk of heart rhythm problems

Does not affect FDA-approved uses for malaria, lupus, and rheumatoid arthritis

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safety-and-availability/fda-cautions-against-use-hydroxychloroquine-or-chloroquine-covid-19-outside-hospital-setting-or

Medicine and miracle drugs are the last thing on earth that should be politicized.

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.25  Sparty On  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.24    5 months ago

Nah, the only disingenuous thing is still comparing bloodletting to a malaria drug that has shown potential in some studies in treating Covid-19.  

But by all means, when you have a bloodletting study that shows promise in treating the Covid-19 virus let us know.

I'd love to read it.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.26  Split Personality  replied to  Sparty On @6.1.25    5 months ago
With our present understanding of pathophysiology we might be tempted to laugh at such methods of therapy. But what will physicians think of our current medical practice 100 years from now? They may be astonished at our overuse of antibiotics, our ten­dency to polypharmacy, and the blunt­ness of treatments like radiation and chemo­therapy. https://www.bcmj.org/premise/history-bloodletting

Btw a member here was bending over backwards to justify Trumps "musings" about light therapy and disinfectants and very clearly demonstrated blood cleansing by removing it from the body long enough to use ultraviolet light to kill the virus. Similar suggestions were made about using ECMO artificial lungs to remove a patient's blood and dose it with ozone before returning it.

All in the name of defending the President's  thinking out loud.

Thank goodness, most doctors take the Hippocratic Oath seriously.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.1.27  Split Personality  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.1.22    5 months ago

Thanks DP.

 
 
 
KDMichigan
6.1.28  KDMichigan  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.26    5 months ago
Btw a member here was bending over backwards to justify Trumps "musings" about light therapy

BTW we had plenty of members here saying President Trump said to drink bleach. Some even professed to be in the medical field. No harm in disinformation though is there?

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.29  Sparty On  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.26    5 months ago

Redirect blinker on ...... clickty, tick, clickty, tick, clickty, tick ......

Thank God some of us don't take EVERYTHING Trumps says out of context and turn it into any possible context one can create that might shed a bad light on Trump.

The TDS is surely strong in those ones ....

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.1.30  Sparty On  replied to  KDMichigan @6.1.28    5 months ago

Thx KD.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.1.31  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  Sparty On @6.1.29    5 months ago
Thank God some of us don't take EVERYTHING Trumps says out of context

We all listened to exactly what he said many times and it's very clear what both the context and content were, and it was very troubling to both Democrats, Republicans, Independents and disinfectant companies that had to come out with statements disavowing the suggestions the bumbling inept moron President made. Did he say to drink bleach? No, and I haven't seen many claim he did, though saying that disinfectants could be used as injections what obviously the danger everyone was talking about.

"And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside of the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And I think you said you're going to test that too. Sounds interesting, And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning? So it'd be interesting to check that. I'm not a doctor. But I'm, like, a person that has a good you-know-what." - DJT

You know for a fact you would be laughing historically and acting all concerned if that woefully uninformed moronic statement had come out of a Democrat Presidents mouth. Heck, if that had been the headline from an interview with former President Obama where he was asked what might the current President do to fight the corona virus you know every conservative here would be screaming to high heaven about what a complete moron he must be for making such an idiotic statement and the serious health risks it obviously infers.

 
 
 
TTGA
6.1.32  TTGA  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.1.22    5 months ago
HCQ has been around for 70 years or so." their obvious point was that somehow, because it had been around a while, that proved it safe and effective.

Here's the example of your mistake DP, assuming it was a mistake.  Safe and Effective are not joined at the hip.  Having been used since 1946 it has been proven to be safe. That is unquestioned.  Whether it's effective for Covid 19 has yet to be completely determined.  Early tests have shown that good results sometimes happen, and more recent results show that it works better if it is administered much earlier in the disease than has been done.  Like most medications, it has much less of a beneficial effect if its administration is delayed until the patient is almost dead already.  That is, however, pretty much irrelevant.  If it's proven to be safe, as it long since has been, and you think that it might help, then GO FOR IT.  It might help and will not harm the patient.  If it helps, good.  If it doesn't help, it's one of numerous things that might help, and using it does not result in a loss.

 
 
 
TTGA
6.1.33  TTGA  replied to  Split Personality @6.1.26    5 months ago
But what will physicians think of our current medical practice 100 years from now?

SP, ordinarily I would just dismiss this with a quick "Who the hell cares what doctors or anyone else will think 100 years from now, we won't be there to notice".  There is, however, one thing that I would hope that doctors 100 years from now wouldn't think about the doctors of today.  I wouldn't want them to think, "Those doctors used the Hippocratic Oath as an excuse to sit there and watch their patients die rather than use every method that could possibly be used to save them, whether that method was proven to work or not"

 
 
 
1stwarrior
6.1.34  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.1.31    5 months ago

And, any person with a lick of common sense would listen/look at what he said and "PROBABLY" say - "well, that's different and, you're right, you're not a doctor, so let them work on the solution."

But, we've got too many on NT lately who really have issues with using common sense.

Sad.

Nice try at derailing.

 
 
 
FLYNAVY1
6.1.35  FLYNAVY1  replied to  MAGA @6.1.12    5 months ago

And promoting hydroxychloroquinine as being either safe and/or effective against Corvid-19 in the face of the test data isn't just hostile.... it's stupid-dangerous!

https://www.mercurynews.com/2020/04/21/hydroxychloroquine-test-more-deaths-no-benefit-in-va-study/  

 
 
 
Jasper2529
6.1.36  Jasper2529  replied to  TTGA @6.1.32    5 months ago

I can't believe that this still has to be explained.

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.1.37  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  TTGA @6.1.32    5 months ago
Having been used since 1946 it has been proven to be safe. That is unquestioned.

"Study finds no benefit, higher death rate in patients taking hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19"

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/21/health/hydroxychloroquine-veterans-study/index.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2020/04/13/how-false-hope-spread-about-hydroxychloroquine-its-consequences/

If it doesn't help, it's one of numerous things that might help, and using it does not result in a loss.

"CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found no evidence that use of hydroxychloroquine, either with or without azithromycin, reduced the risk of mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with Covid-19. An association of increased overall mortality was identified in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine alone ."

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v2

Advice like yours and this inept President can have real world consequences that can lead to people [ dying Deleted ]

 
 
 
1stwarrior
6.1.38  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Dismayed Patriot @6.1.37    5 months ago

For folks with high blood pressure and/or heart disease - no, there is no benefit of reducing the risk of ventilation.

Well, now you've used your caveat to pigeon hole something you want to talk about without discussing the thread in a grand effort to malign me, the seeder.

Sorry - gonna try to get a mod to determine your "intent", since it surely wasn't to add to the discussion.

 
 
 
Dulay
6.1.39  Dulay  replied to  Sparty On @6.1.25    5 months ago
But by all means, when you have a bloodletting study that shows promise in treating the Covid-19 virus let us know. I'd love to read it.

Can you cite one that shows that HCQ shows promise?

 
 
 
Dulay
6.1.40  Dulay  replied to  TTGA @6.1.32    5 months ago

All I can say is that I hope that you are making that statement out of ignorance. Go read the side effects of HCQ and review the possibility of lethal overdose. 

 
 
 
Dulay
6.1.41  Dulay  replied to  TTGA @6.1.33    5 months ago

IMHO it would be worse for them to think " Those idiots administered drugs to patients because a narcissistic moronic leader told them it was good stuff."

 
 
 
JohnRussell
6.2  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6    5 months ago

These two appeared on Fox News, multiple times I think.

They serve a purpose for the corona virus deniers. 

 
 
 
Jasper2529
6.2.1  Jasper2529  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2    5 months ago
These two appeared on Fox News, multiple times I think.

So have Bernie Sanders, De Blasio, Cuomo, Murphy, Sharpton, Klobuchar, etc. Your point?

 
 
 
MAGA
6.2.2  MAGA  replied to  JohnRussell @6.2    5 months ago

There are no Wuhan virus deniers here.  

 
 
 
Dismayed Patriot
6.2.3  Dismayed Patriot  replied to  MAGA @6.2.2    5 months ago
There are no Wuhan virus deniers here.  

Hilarious that you're trying to re-brand it to deflect any collective responsibility and blame one racial group or culture. Does that mean I can just re-brand the deniers and claim they are infected with dumb-shits disease? Because it's pretty clear they have been showing severe symptoms, especially in this seed.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
6.3  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6    5 months ago

Think you'll notice that it is an OPINION piece - the other side of the story????

Nothing in the opinion opts for DO IT OR ELSE - don't eat chlorine tablets - don't slip on a banana peel - don't walk in front of a bus - don't stick your finger in an electrical socket.

No, the article is not dangerous.  If that's the case, then at least 50% of the articles on the FP are dangerous as most of them are BS or lies.

 
 
 
Dulay
6.3.1  Dulay  replied to  1stwarrior @6.3    5 months ago
Think you'll notice that it is an OPINION piece

Perhaps then you'd be willing to move it from News & Politics to Oo/Ed where it belongs. 

 
 
 
Sparty On
6.3.2  Sparty On  replied to  1stwarrior @6.3    5 months ago

Spot on there 1st but when an article doesn't push a popular narrative for a given venue, it will be attacked mercilessly regardless.

Groupthink at its worst ......

 
 
 
TTGA
6.3.3  TTGA  replied to  Sparty On @6.3.2    5 months ago
Spot on there 1st but when an article doesn't push a popular narrative for a given venue, it will be attacked mercilessly regardless. Groupthink at its worst ......

Yep, and then the trolls and the deflectors start hammering on the irrelevant technical details.

 
 
 
pat wilson
6.4  pat wilson  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6    5 months ago

This article is based on opinions of two doctors in Bakersfield that run an urgent care clinic. Of course they think the covid response is a hoax. They want their clinic to be busy again, that's it. If their one-star yelp reviews are to be believed you would never step foot in  their clinic.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
6.4.1  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  pat wilson @6.4    5 months ago

You hit it on the head Pat.  

We must all remember that our opinion is NOT the only opinion and there are some opinions that will flat out kill ya.

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.4.2  Split Personality  replied to  pat wilson @6.4    5 months ago

They actually own 7 or 8 of these clinics, it's unclear if their headquarters is listed twice or actually sees patients.

I imagine they want more floor traffic for sure.

Some of them are in strip malls while a few are rather large buildings that must cost quite a bit to rent.

Just saying, these two guys are much more businessmen now, than practicing doctors.

 
 
 
MAGA
6.4.3  MAGA  replied to  Split Personality @6.4.2    5 months ago

Disagree with the opinion, attack the opinion by making allusion to what you consider an ulterior motive in order to denigrate said opinion?  

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.4.4  Split Personality  replied to  MAGA @6.4.3    5 months ago

ok,, lets say you own 10 gas stations and don't know anyone who has died from this virus.

Would you not be antsy for the public to get going? Start traveling? Start buying gas again?  Buy snacks at the gas station

or get their cars fixed?  That's what businesses do.

Someone has to worry about inventory, rent, electric, taxes, payroll etc.

Any businessman is going to have the same reaction that Erickson and Massih have expressed.

They just happen to be doctors claiming special opinions.

Their opinions are not special because of their education or chosen profession.

 
 
 
MAGA
6.4.5  MAGA  replied to  Split Personality @6.4.4    5 months ago

Gas stations and auto repair shops are open

 
 
 
Split Personality
6.4.6  Split Personality  replied to  MAGA @6.4.5    5 months ago

Once again, an analogy is a complete waste of your time.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
6.5  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6    5 months ago

Hense my comment #3.

 
 
 
MAGA
6.6  MAGA  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @6    5 months ago

It likely got much larger circulation in the Washington Times and other conservative sites that use their opinion articles than by 1st seeding it here.  

 
 
 
Kavika
7  Kavika     5 months ago

If you truly believe this ''opinion'' 1st, then you should just move on over to the Navajo rez or any Pueblo's close to you and explain to them that this virus is all overblown BS. 

 
 
 
Split Personality
7.1  Split Personality  replied to  Kavika @7    5 months ago

Everyone that thinks it a hoax should visit NYC and volunteer to move the victim's remains with out any PPE.

Sound reasonable?

 
 
 
devangelical
7.1.1  devangelical  replied to  Split Personality @7.1    5 months ago

sounds reasonable and logical to me. right wing radio has been hyping these two quacks for weeks. their indirect facilitation of possible disease expansion with their herd immunity theory amounts to risking the extermination of america's most vulnerable. all for the sake of the ridding the economy of their idea of human liabilities and to get the incompetent fool that allowed covid-19 to get this far by ignoring the warnings of health experts for more than two months at the onset.

 
 
 
devangelical
7.1.2  devangelical  replied to  devangelical @7.1.1    5 months ago

... incompetent fool re-elected...

oops, edit error...

 
 
 
1stwarrior
7.2  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Kavika @7    5 months ago

Where did I say I believed this opinion?  I put it out because there are other thought paths regarding this issue and I truly expect ADULTS to be able to discuss OTHER concepts - such as is being put forth in this opinion piece.

 
 
 
Split Personality
7.2.1  Split Personality  replied to  1stwarrior @7.2    5 months ago

Speaking from experience of many, many years, a seeder rarely published something he or she wants to be

trashed and attacked.

The opposite is almost always true in a political atmosphere.

 
 
 
Kavika
7.2.2  Kavika   replied to  1stwarrior @7.2    5 months ago

Well perhaps an ADULT such as yourself would have explained that in their intro or first comment. You can review your first comment and try to explain to me that you are not hyping this opinion. 

What other concept did the article discuss other than the numbers are a hoax and we need to open up the country?

I'm more than willing to discuss other concepts but you have to put one forward to have a discussion like an adult. 

 
 
 
Snuffy
7.2.3  Snuffy  replied to  1stwarrior @7.2    5 months ago

And that's the problem both with this board as well as life in general any more.  We are no longer allowed to discuss other concepts or ideas,  we must always be in lockstep or we get called out. It gets very frustrating at times.

 
 
 
1stwarrior
7.2.4  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Kavika @7.2.2    5 months ago

You know better than that.

I don't need to explain myself.  If you'll note, the title states specifically that this is an opinion piece.  I don't have to get on a soapbox and shout out that this is not MY opinion, but is the opinion of the author. 

Most adults would recognize that "silent statement", especially most adults who know me and have had discussions with me on various topics.

The article is very clear - there is a lot of unreliable information being thrown around by all - computer modeling is inaccurate - death count is inaccurate - lab results aren't satisfactory - number of strains current are incorrect.  It is up to the person(s) reading the article to make up their mind as to what is/is not believable - and that's what adults are usually good at doing - making up their own mind with the information available.

 
 
 
Kavika
7.2.5  Kavika   replied to  1stwarrior @7.2.4    5 months ago

I mentioned that ''opinion'' in my first comment to you. 

Most adults would recognize that "silent statement", especially most adults who know me and have had discussions with me on various topics.

Then I must not be an adult since a ''silent statement'' is one that is not heard or seen and as I stated in my previous comment you did nothing to dissuade one from thinking that you were in agreement with the opinion piece. 

All of those items you listed as unreliable are two doctors' opinions. If you like you should research the number of deaths from the virus in nursing homes and veterans' homes that were not being counted. 

You can make it crystal clear by letting me or the readers of the article if this is your belief or not.. It's up to you.

 

 
 
 
Kavika
7.2.6  Kavika   replied to  Kavika @7.2.5    5 months ago

 
 
 
MAGA
7.2.7  MAGA  replied to  Snuffy @7.2.3    5 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
Raven Wing
7.2.8  Raven Wing  replied to  Kavika @7.2.6    5 months ago

Great video Kavika.

 
 
 
MAGA
7.2.9  MAGA  replied to  MAGA @7.2.7    5 months ago

[deleted]

 
 
 
MAGA
7.2.11  MAGA  replied to  Snuffy @7.2.3    5 months ago

Tell me all about it.  You are so right on about all that you said here.  🇺🇸🗽🦅👌👍👏

 
 
 
MAGA
7.2.12  MAGA  replied to  Snuffy @7.2.3    5 months ago

Tyrants Gone Wild – Ben Garrison Cartoon

Posted by:   Ben Garrison  in   Political Cartoons   May 4, 2020 1 Comment

virus_tyrants.jpghttps://grrrgraphics.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/virus_tyrants-300x233.jpg 300w, https://grrrgraphics.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/virus_tyrants-1024x794.jpg.pagespeed.ce.8iKeBLU3LY.jpg 1024w, https://grrrgraphics.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/virus_tyrants-768x596.jpg 768w, https://grrrgraphics.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/virus_tyrants-1536x1191.jpg 1536w, https://grrrgraphics.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/virus_tyrants-600x465.jpg 600w" width="1041" height="807" style="max-width:none;margin:0.5em auto;display:block;height:auto;width:375px;" >

The coronavirus gave many of the so-called leaders in this country an opportunity to reveal their true selves. Many may have suspected before, but now all doubt has been removed: They’re vicious tyrants.

Across the country, many mayors, governors, and congressional leaders have demonstrated just what control freaks they really are. Gavin Newsom, head tyrant of California, has closed all beaches. No, you can’t enjoy the waves, salt air, and sunlight—all virus destroyers—because he said so. He’s going to tell all Californians what they can and cannot do. Shut up and obey!

Michigan’s governor Gretchen Whitmer is a real piece of work. She denounced those who protested the lockdown as ‘racist.’ She made sure every Walmart store taped off their gardening sections because she considers them ’ non-essential.’ She gets to decide what you can and cannot buy.

New York City Mayor Bill De Blasio is having a field day. He wants his city locked down until at least July. Probably after July 4th so Americans can’t get together and celebrate Independence Day. The mayor crossed the line by threatening Jews who were holding prayer meetings and funerals. He instructed the police to ‘round them up!’

Many sheriffs and policemen have been behaving disgracefully. I saw a video in which the local sheriff and his deputy threatened a mother because her child went next door to play with a neighbor child. Oh no, can’t have that kind of freedom! The sheriff could have ignored it enforcing such an unconstitutional directive, but no…they love arresting, fining, and yelling at the sheeple. They are in tyrant heaven.

The worst tyrant of them all is the sociopath Bill Gates. His 100 billion dollar fortune has enabled him to greatly influence the medical field in a global manner, even though Bill is not trained in medicine. He doesn’t have a medical degree or even a college degree. He does have experience in dirty dealing. He was a ruthless businessman who shafted other programmers as he cobbled together a buggy and virus-riddled windows operating system. Now that squeaky-voiced geek…that nerd…that unelected ‘authority’ … that  TYRANT …wants to control us all through a vile vaccine with built-in tracking technology. If you don’t take his shot, you won’t be able to travel or work. We must not let Kill Bill have his way.

A horrific and dystopian future awaits us all if we don’t start pushing back against the tyrants. We don’t need their permission to be human beings.

—Ben Garrison      https://www.gopusa.com/coronavirus-pandemic-trump-derangement-syndrome-bad-math/

 
 
 
1stwarrior
7.2.13  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Split Personality @7.2.1    5 months ago

Well, if you knew my background, you'd see that I was "trained" another way.:-)

 
 
 
1stwarrior
7.2.14  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  MAGA @7.2.12    5 months ago

Too bad that's from a well-known Repub media site - shows you just how futched up "somebody's" knowledge/experience and total lack thereof will, if followed, cause a lot of irreparable harm to our citizens.

 
 
 
Split Personality
7.2.15  Split Personality  replied to  1stwarrior @7.2.13    5 months ago

Then I apologize for falling into the "social media mindset".

 
 
 
1stwarrior
7.2.16  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  Split Personality @7.2.15    5 months ago

No worries :-)

Not everybody was raised the same way.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
8  JohnRussell    5 months ago

1st, you seeded an article lauding two doctors that have been widely debunked. It takes about 15 seconds to find expert opinion that thinks the two doctors are way off base.  This is only one of the many rebuttals of their conclusions. 

https://respectfulinsolence.com/2020/04/28/erickson-massihi-bogus-epidemiology-covid-19/

A response to the video circulating by Drs. Dan Erickson and Artin Massihi on COVID-19 prevalence and immunity.

The two doctors, who own a chain of urgent cares in central California together, held a press conference where they announced the results of the testing they'd conducted and their interpretation of the data. Their take included political and economic recommendations based on their personal convictions, which will not be discussed here.

They made two epidemiology/im munology claims:
1) 340 / 5213 (6.5%) diagnostic tests were positive at their urgent cares. They conclude, scaling up, that 6.5% of the entire Central Valley is therefore positive. For Bakersfield, CA: it would mean about 58,000 people had the virus, far more than the nearly 700 confirmed cases. We should calculate mortality and morbidity (hospitalization, ICU) rates accordingly, they argue.

2) Prolonged social distancing damages the immune system, and we are all becoming weaker for staying at home.

MORE PEOPLE HAVE HEART ATTACKS AND BROKEN LEGS IN ERs THAN IN A SHOPPING MALL

Their fatal, immediate, obvious, rookie mistake is that their 5213 people are in NO WAY REPRESENTATIVE of the population at large. Although we don't know how many (because the data was not that thorough)- we can assume a decent chunk of these people had symptoms of COVID, sought care, and were tested. Their urgent cares had the lion's share of COVID tests for the entire Central Valley (which is awesome). So ANYONE in Bakersfield who felt worried would go there. Presumably doctors referred patients there whom they felt needed testing.

Walk around an ER on a Friday night. If 4 out of 50 patients had broken legs, and another 10 had heart attacks, you can't assume 8% of the city fell off a ladder when drunk that night and a full quarter were clutching their chest in an armchair as we speak. In epidemiology terms, that's selection bias- bias introduced by a non-random sample.

So, essentially their calculations are entirely invalid. If they could somehow prove that the 5213 were an entirely random sample of people which was perfectly representative of the age, sex, pre-existing conditions, ethnic background and degree of symptomatology of the Central Valley, that would be different.

UNLESS YOU LIVE INSIDE AN AUTOCLAVE, YOUR HOME IS PLENTY PATHOGEN-RICH

The world is absolutely teeming with microbes. You're coated in them, your house is coated in them, they enter your body with every breath you take and everything you eat. Your immune system is getting a perfectly adequate workout. You're just restricting your exposure to a handful of things (respiratory pathogens) for a very short period of time.

The doctors have every unalienable right to express their personal views, but the evidence they offered to back those views up is invalid (and immunologically laughable). The Denominator is larger than the official case count (evidence for that discussed repeatedly on this page, and is now accepted dogma). Of course that will downwardly adjust the relevant rates. There's no need to hand-wave.
 
 
 
1stwarrior
8.1  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  JohnRussell @8    5 months ago

John - the most intelligent comment in that thread is - "The problem, of course, is that estimating, for example, prevalence of exposure to COVID-19 and case fatality rates is very difficult in the middle of a pandemic in which there is insufficient testing, case numbers are still climbing, and the antibody tests likely have high false positive rates, and if you don’t have any training you don’t even know what you don’t know. 

IMHO, the two Doc's used the typical polling mechanism - don't set any boundaries nor criteria, but select a population that "may" give you the basis for the results you want.

I am not advocating their rationale - I'm just posting an opposing view for discussion purposes.

 
 
 
JBB
9  JBB    5 months ago

The dumbass article is opinion. A damn bad no good lying wrongheaded ill conceived stupid misleading and dangerous opinion. Butt, an opinion none the less...

 
 
 
1stwarrior
9.1  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  JBB @9    5 months ago

Glad to see that you have an open mind and the ability to intelligently discuss it.  Come back after a couple cups of coffee.

BTW - everyone has an opinion and, in this country, they are free to voice that opinion.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
9.2  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  JBB @9    5 months ago

You know what they say about opinions.

 
 
 
It Is ME
10  It Is ME    5 months ago

Sorry….but I just see regular "Influenza" numbers, hyped to "Extorsion Levels" by the media !

 
 
 
It Is ME
10.1  It Is ME  replied to  It Is ME @10    5 months ago

Researcher "Pre-Prints" have been flowing freely, and the "Media" picks out the ones they want to run with for a "sale/Money".

Pretty Sad.

 
 
 
Split Personality
10.2  Split Personality  replied to  It Is ME @10    5 months ago

Weird, what happened to my comment?

Sorry….but I just see regular "Influenza" numbers

True to an extent, but that depends on where the final body count comes in.  So far we are less than 60 days in, record time to reach 70,000 and not a good omen for the next 9 or 10 months.

Previous pandemics in the US usually run 12 to 13 months then burn out on their own.  that is likely with Covid also and it will mutate and come back, most likely weaker, that has been the trend.

Their is no mention of the pandemics or what Eisenhower did in 1957-58.  the CDC estimates that 116,000 were killed.

I remember my parents were much more concerned about polio than any expected flu.

During the 68-69 pandemic everyone from Lydon Johnson down was focused on Vietnam. The

CDC estimated that 100,000 died.

Not even a mention of flu epidemics on their respective Wikipedia pages, it was business as usual.

In 2009 while trying to claw our way out of the worst economy ever, Obama turned over the pandemic to the CDC.

Thankfully we had tissue samples from 1918 which had been researched off and on for decades, we had much better hospital care and vaccines came to market within months.  DCD estimates less than 13,000 died in addition to the regular 40,000 seasonal flu deaths which are all now variants of H1N1.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
10.3  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  It Is ME @10    5 months ago
Sorry….but I just see regular "Influenza" numbers

It is kind of ironic that influenza numbers aren't being announced.  Leads me to believe that there is a possibility that part of the Covid cases could be nothing more than the flu.

 
 
 
Split Personality
10.3.1  Split Personality  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @10.3    5 months ago
Conclusion. CDC estimates that influenza was associated with more than 35.5 million illnesses, more than 16.5 million medical visits, 490,600 hospitalizations, and 34,200 deaths during the 2018– 2019 influenza season

CDC estimates* that, from October 1, 2019 , through April 4, 2020 , there have been:

24,000 – 62,000
flu deaths

https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/burden/preliminary-in-season-estimates.htm

Always exasperated by the wide ranges.

Leads me to believe that there is a possibility that part of the Covid cases could be nothing more than the flu.

They can identify the various strains though DNA or RNA testing, hence all of insistence on testing.

 
 
 
Jeremy Retired in NC
10.3.2  Jeremy Retired in NC  replied to  Split Personality @10.3.1    5 months ago

And are they doing the testing?  IF they are, it's not being reported.  Until then it doesn't change my statement.

 
 
 
Split Personality
10.3.3  Split Personality  replied to  Jeremy Retired in NC @10.3.2    5 months ago
And are they doing the testing?

Yes postpartum.

IF they are, it's not being reported.

Sure it is, on their website.  Like I said it has a wide range and gets into the chicken or egg conundrum.

Did the patient die from the flu? Did the flu cause cardiac arrest or did a life time of smoking?

No one can agree.

Until then it doesn't change my statement.

jrSmiley_26_smiley_image.gif

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
11  sandy-2021492    5 months ago

https://thelogicofscience.com/2020/04/29/shoddy-statistics-and-false-claims-dr-erickson-dangerously-misled-the-public-on-coronavirus/?fbclid=IwAR2zNK7SXDYtlnADDNt5dTUxXzKDNt7SfJlDEPfAsq2_6FxbUmrmPFE-FOM

Coronavirus testing thus far has been a very biased sample. It has not been truly random sampling. Rather, it has been heavily biased towards people who had symptoms, people who were in contact with someone who developed COVID19, people at high risk, etc. In other words, the percentage of positive cases in the testing is probably much higher than the actual state or country-wide percentages, just as our estimate of dark blue marbles was unrealistically high. This means that our intrepid doctors overestimated the total number of cases, thus vastly underestimating the mortality rate. They calculated mortality by dividing known deaths by their estimated cases, which means the higher the number of estimated cases, the lower the death rate.

The other problem is that they are only using the people that have died thus far, but that number is going to keep going up, even if no one else ever becomes infected. In other words, some of the people who are infected with COVID right now are going to die. So, you can’t take the ongoing infection data and divide the number of deaths by the number of cases, because people are still dying. That number is going to keep going up. To illustrate, let’s say that we have 10,000 currently infected people, plus another 10,000 who have either died (100) or recovered (9900). It would be stupid to take those deaths (100) and divide by all those cases (20,000) and conclude that there is only a 0.5% death rate. We can’t do that because we still have 10,000 people who are infected, some of which will die. Do you see the point? Using these numbers midway (as they did) biases the results towards a lower death rate.

These very basic problems with their analyses completely nullify their results. The numbers they are basing their arguments on are invalid, which means that they have nothing to back up their claims.
 
 
 
1stwarrior
11.1  seeder  1stwarrior  replied to  sandy-2021492 @11    5 months ago

Sandy - that's pretty much what a lot of folks, scientific and non-scientific, are saying.  We don't know enough about what's happening to be making pronouncements that it is/is not safe to go about normal living because "we have a cure coming".  That cure may not be here from anywhere of 6 months to 36 months.  The disease "may" start becoming less lethal - but, then again, it may become very lethal.

Everyone knows pretty much that the "numbers" being crunched aren't exact.  They are either overstated or underestimated - but we don't know.  The Federal, State and local GOVERNMENTS are making decisions based on not quite correct/accurate data.  The medical field are the experts and the politicians should just shut the hell up and let the medical folks do their work. 

All this crap of blaming Trump and this administration is BS.  NONE of them are medical experts and they are just answering with wing-it responses in an effort to attempt to calm folks down.  But, we have so many "politicians" who, because of their position of power, believe they know what's best for all.

Excellent info - thanks.

 
 
 
sandy-2021492
11.1.1  sandy-2021492  replied to  1stwarrior @11.1    5 months ago
Everyone knows pretty much that the "numbers" being crunched aren't exact.

There's a difference between working with numbers that you know aren't exact, but are the best you can obtain, and making broad pronouncements based on numbers that you should know are skewed, but apparently either don't know or won't admit to knowing.  These guys should know that they're working with flawed data, but they forge on ahead, anyway, and made pronouncements that were, in their own words, emphatic.

That's stupid.  It shows either a real or willful ignorance of science.  In statistics, if your sample is lousy, all the data you extrapolate from that sample was lousy.  These guys either ignored or forgot that, and we're supposed to base policy on their bad science?  These medical guys demonstrably are not experts, but they have an MD behind their names, so people take what they say as gospel.

 
 
 
Buzz of the Orient
12  Buzz of the Orient    5 months ago

I think that those who stand by the opinion that it's all a hoax should just put their health and life where their mouth is - rip off the mask, go out and congregate, cough and sneeze on your spouse and kids, and everyone else you can possibly come close to. What the hell, it's all just a hoax, fake news, there's no reason to panic.  

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

JohnRussell
GregTx
Greg Jones
lady in black
Tacos!
Jasper2529
JBB
r.t..b...
AndrewK
zuksam

cjcold


39 visitors