Unlicensed Dermatologist Suggests People Throw Coronavirus Parties

  
Via:  John Russell  •  3 days ago  •  15 comments


Unlicensed Dermatologist Suggests People Throw Coronavirus Parties
The Federalist published a random businessman’s plan to deliberately infect people in the name of economic growth.

Leave a comment to auto-join group Down With Trump

Down With Trump

384


S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


Even for the Federalist—the mysteriously funded right-wing rag that has been busy  feverishly defending  Donald Trump’s every decision,  even the ones that have killed people , and  manufacturing outrage  over “manufactured outrage” over Trump’s  blatant racism —the article is a disgrace.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A Portland dermatologist named Doug Perednia who is, according to state records, not currently licensed to practice medicine in Oregon has published a plan calling for people to be voluntarily infected with the coronavirus in order to foster herd immunity and get America back to work.

In an article titled   “How Medical ‘Chickenpox Parties’ Could Turn The Tide Of The Wuhan Virus,”   Perednia says mitigation and suppression of the virus are not viable solutions because “Savings, capital, income, and taxes all evaporate. Companies begin to close, and many will not have the resources to begin again. Massive deficits will become a huge burden for future generations.” His credit identifies him as "a physician in Portland, Oregon.”








"That would be misleading the public," a startled member of the Oregon Medical Board staff told VICE. "In Oregon, that is a violation of the Medical Practices Act. That would have to be investigated."

Even for the Federalist—the mysteriously funded right-wing rag that has been busy   feverishly defending   Donald Trump’s every decision,   even the ones that have killed people , and   manufacturing outrage   over “manufactured outrage” over Trump’s   blatant racism —the article is a disgrace.

Perednia and Ben Domenech, the publisher of the Federalist, did not respond to messages seeking comment.

Though the article bills the writer as a physician, his medical license is lapsed,   according   to the Oregon Medical Board, meaning he may not practice medicine. According to his   LinkedIn , Perednia has spent the last 25 years as a businessman of various sorts. He has a bold plan to get people sick so the economy can get healthy: Give young people the virus at a “safe infection site” and then house them in quarantine in a hotel or cruise ship for two weeks or send them home to self-quarantine for two weeks. (“Given the recent example of spring break 2020 for college students in Florida, one could imagine CVI even becoming a social activity,” the quack writes.) Then, after two weeks in quarantine, the young people will test negative for the virus and will be sent on their merry way to work and buy stuff. No worry about those who get sick—“patients who experience serious medical complications would be evacuated to an acute care facility.”






One of the benefits of this plan, he explains, is that “People who are immune cannot pass on the disease to others” and so “could help treat patients, care for vulnerable populations, and keep the economy functioning.” There is considerable   evidence , to be clear, that people who have recovered from COVID-19 infection can become reinfected and infect others.

Never mind that, or the fact that   hospitals are already overwhelmed , there is a   crippling shortage of tests , and   young people   can die and   are dying   from the virus. Perednia says we need to think “outside the box” if we’re going to save our economy.

“Economies are like a living organism—as soon as their normal functions are shut down, they begin to die,” he writes, apparently unironically.

Of course, Perednia and the Federalist aren’t the only ghouls out there setting up a false choice between mass death and economic failure and then declaring they’re ready to chalk up hundreds of thousands of preventable deaths as the cost of doing business.


This iframe is not allowed



This iframe is not allowed




This iframe is not allowed


Say what you will about these freaks; at least they aren’t presenting this as medical expertise.

Update 3:25 p.m. ET:   Mediaite   reported   that Twitter temporarily locked the Federalist's account for violating the Twitter Rules regarding COVID-19.


Tags

jrGroupDiscuss - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
JohnRussell
1  seeder  JohnRussell    3 days ago
"That would be misleading the public," a startled member of the Oregon Medical Board staff told VICE. "In Oregon, that is a violation of the Medical Practices Act. That would have to be investigated."

Even for the Federalist—the mysteriously funded right-wing rag that has been busy      feverishly defending       Donald Trump’s every decision,      even the ones that have killed people   , and      manufacturing outrage       over “manufactured outrage” over Trump’s      blatant racism   —the article is a disgrace.

Perednia and Ben Domenech, the publisher of the Federalist, did not respond to messages seeking comment.
 
 
 
JohnRussell
2  seeder  JohnRussell    3 days ago
Y8yeDUx4_normal.jpg
Jesse Kelly
@JesseKellyDC

If given the choice between dying and plunging the country I love into a Great Depression, I’d happily die. https:// twitter.com/tropopause/sta tus/1242440169757835264 

Trop @Tropopause

Okay @ BuckSexton @ JesseKellyDC @ MattWalshBlog @ lloydblankfein @ LtGovTX , if you believe high COVID-19 mortality is an acceptable trade-off, then you must be ready to die rather than add to the surge of COVID-19 patients stressing our nation's hospitals beyond capacity. Are you?

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
2.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  JohnRussell @2    3 days ago

OK some people value money over life. Go figure?

 
 
 
jungkonservativ111
2.1.1  jungkonservativ111  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1    3 days ago

There are 8 billion people in this world. Carbon emissions are soaring. We are polluting all sources of water and life on this planet to keep up with the current population. I'm saying that to say this, maybe the world would be fine with a few less people. I mean on the current trajectory a lot of us will die anyways from rising oceans, At least this way nature weeds out those who aren't strong to begin with. Why should the remaining people left alive live in misery trying to prevent what's natural? I'm sorry to be taking this type of nihilistic approach, but this is a progressive society. We are all just clumps of cells and electrical impulses. Our life span is nothing but a tiny blip hardly noticeable in the history of this earth when you consider the grand scheme of things. Americans especially put too much value on life because we are all spoiled. We have never endured hardship and think it unreasonable that we should ever have problems or perish. Nature is bringing us to reality, big time

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.2  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  jungkonservativ111 @2.1.1    3 days ago

Should poor people kill themselves? 

Until recently, down through history the great majority of human beings have been poor. 

Back in the "old" days, most human beings lives were short and nasty and often painful.  There weren't many mass suicides of despair, presumably, because the earth was, in fact, populated. 

It may sound 'noble' to say that a world without material comfort or excess is not worth living, but that is not the general experience of human beings on this planet.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.3  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @2.1    3 days ago
OK some people value money over life. Go figure?

Trump says that if people lose money there will be mass suicides, so at least for him the answer is yes.  I'm sure there are others as well. 

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.4  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.2    3 days ago

Nowadays they hang on become obese and soak their fellow tax payers for 20 to 30 years.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
2.1.5  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  MUVA @2.1.4    3 days ago

So you are recommending suicide to those who are not "successful" . Interesting. 

 
 
 
MUVA
2.1.6  MUVA  replied to  JohnRussell @2.1.5    3 days ago

Never, just maybe a healthier  lifestyle less weed smoking and junk food eating.  

 
 
 
lady in black
3  lady in black    3 days ago

Another in a long line of nut jobs

 
 
 
Tacos!
4  Tacos!    3 days ago

Seems like an idea that hasn't been very well thought through.

 
 
 
Ender
5  Ender    3 days ago

Hate to say it but it is things like this that make me think he needs to practice what he preaches.

Let himself get infected. I bet he doesn't have the guts.

Then again, he might try to infect other people.

No wonder this quack doesn't have a license.

 
 
 
MUVA
6  MUVA    3 days ago

I didn't realize people had stupid Ideas thanks for the info.This Idea is as bad as sending everyone a check.  

 
 
 
JohnRussell
7  seeder  JohnRussell    3 days ago

Capitalist Death Cultists Demand Mass Human Sacrifice

https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/k7e53y/trump-cuomo-economic-viability-over-saving-lives-coronavirus

As the coronavirus rages across the country, killing dozens of people a day, overwhelming hospitals, and demolishing the lives of anyone who's not able to keep making an income from home, our government has started to seriously float a new strategy to deal with the deadly global pandemic:  let potentially millions of people die  long, excruciating deaths in order to more quickly repair the economy.

I've spent the last 16 days hiding in my apartment to do whatever I can to not get sick and to "flatten the curve," a mantra we've been holding on to for dear life as the world falls apart around us. The idea is that by extremely limiting our movement and contact with other people, we'll be able to slow the spread of coronavirus to a pace that our healthcare system could better manage. Hospitals in New York City, an epicenter of the pandemic, are already overwhelmed. The number of available beds is running out faster than the state and hospitals are able to increase capacity, the   number of available and life saving ventilators   is quickly dwindling, and   healthcare providers are already coming in to work potentially sick   and   without appropriate protective gear .

Disaster has already struck. It's foolish and dangerous to pretend otherwise. The best we can do now is reduce the amount of human suffering, or at least that's what I thought the goal was when we said "we're all in this together." But   the President ,   the governor of New York , and countless economic palm readers have suggested that some number of easily avoidable deaths is perhaps acceptable and even good if it means people can start going back to work, buying consumer goods, and pulling the stock market up from its weeks-long nosedive.

"WE CANNOT LET THE CURE BE WORSE THAN THE PROBLEM ITSELF. AT THE END OF THE 15 DAY PERIOD, WE WILL MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHICH WAY WE WANT TO GO!,"   Trump tweeted Sunday . Tuesday morning, he tweeted "This is not about the ridiculous Green New Deal. It is about putting our great workers and companies BACK TO WORK!"

This iframe is not allowed
This iframe is not allowed
This iframe is not allowed

New York Governor Andrew Cuomo laid this concept out with a simple , easy to understand image: a teetering see-saw with the mission to "Protect Lives" on one end and the sacramental concept of "Economic Viability" on the other.

1585059769866-image1.png

How can we keep these two apparently conflicting ideas in balance? According to some in government and many economists, if we let our desire to protect lives have all the weight, the economy will fall apart more than it already has, creating instability we haven't seen since the Great Depression, so some amount of death is necessary to keep the economy afloat.

The proposition is ghoulish even by its own twisted logic. We have been looking at a lot of numbers, charts, and graphs in recent weeks: quickly escalating curves, expanding red circles, and exponentially larger figures counting the dead. They are frightening on their own, to be sure, but so is the physical horror behind each of these figures.

It's instructive and not an exaggeration to say that for every avoidable death that we allow as a society in favor of financial gains, we are actively choosing to literally drown a human being in their own blood.

Take, for example,   this account in ProPublica   from a respiratory therapist in Louisiana who describes how quickly and violently even healthy young people succumb to COVID-19:

“In my experience, this severity of ARDS [acute respiratory distress syndrome] is usually more typical of someone who has a near drowning experience—they have a bunch of dirty water in their lungs—or people who inhale caustic gas. Especially for it to have such an acute onset like that. I’ve never seen a microorganism or an infectious process cause such acute damage to the lungs so rapidly. That was what really shocked me.”

“It first struck me how different it was when I saw my first coronavirus patient go bad. I was like, Holy shit, this is not the flu. Watching this relatively young guy, gasping for air, pink frothy secretions coming out of his tube and out of his mouth. The ventilator should have been doing the work of breathing but he was still gasping for air, moving his mouth, moving his body, struggling. We had to restrain him. With all the coronavirus patients, we’ve had to restrain them. They really hyperventilate, really struggle to breathe. When you’re in that mindstate of struggling to breathe and delirious with fever, you don’t know when someone is trying to help you, so you’ll try to rip the breathing tube out because you feel it is choking you, but you are drowning."

Even if we were to accept that subjecting people to this hell in service of the economy was a worthwhile tradeoff, the problem is that the concept of "economic viability," which is presented as infallible and equal to human life, is entirely arbitrary.

It is no more economically viable to let countless die in service of unscrupulous capitalism than it is to let Amazon, one of the most profitable and powerful companies in the world   pay no federal income taxes . It's not inherently more economically viable to let its CEO, and others like him who hoard hundreds of billions in wealth, than it is to redistribute it to those in need in order to save lives.

There are too many examples of this fallacy to list here because our entire society is built to support the lie of "economic viability," which in reality is just the system by which wealth and power is concentrated and protected by the few at the expense of all of us.

It's worth thinking about the nature of the current disaster. Given that its worst effects come from our own failures—the failure of the American healthcare system, the failure to protect labor, and human life, and the general moral failure of capitalism—the coronavirus crisis seems less like a sudden disruption and more like a slow car crash that started decades ago. Our institutions have long been gutted, pared down, privatized, and otherwise optimized for grift and profit, and fatal outcomes were always part of that calculus. Regardless of a pandemic, which is now totally exposing the rot, the same systems kill many thousands of people every day in America and all over the world due to the same failings.

This isn't to downplay the tragedy of the pandemic, instead, it shows that the capitalists who run things have always seen things in terms of a ghoulish PowerPoint. This mindset was always going to lead to mass death, and indeed already does—due to car crashes, toxic consumer goods, for-profit healthcare, the gig economy, and cut-corner construction, just to name a few—and will continue to as long as profit and recklessness are pillars of our society, as opposed to solidarity and foresight.
 
 
 
JohnRussell
7.1  seeder  JohnRussell  replied to  JohnRussell @7    3 days ago

Someone here mentioned a good comparison for this kind of thinking.

The movie Soylent Green, where the old and "useless" were forced to commit suicide for the 'betterment'  of younger people. 

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online

Old Hermit
CB


60 visitors