John Blutarsky
Footballguy
Thomas DolbyScreaming the word "SCIENCE!!!!" to whine about doctors prescribing a drug they believe will work to treat a patient would indicate otherwise.
Thomas DolbyScreaming the word "SCIENCE!!!!" to whine about doctors prescribing a drug they believe will work to treat a patient would indicate otherwise.
It’s so crazy, they will stop at nothing to discredit anything Trump. How many weeks invested in this drug now?Ooof, you were a little too slow bud. Might want to take a look one post up.
I'm sure the media they're parroting will rush to make their retractions and offer their apologies.It’s so crazy, they will stop at nothing to discredit anything Trump. How many weeks invested in this drug now?
Had they not started with the bogus Russian claims and then the follow up bogus impeachment for the last 3 1/2 years perhaps the left would have some credibility...at this point all credibility has been lost.It’s so crazy, they will stop at nothing to discredit anything Trump. How many weeks invested in this drug now?
Its not discrediting Trump...thats the point. The effectiveness of the drug is legitimately in question. That isn't agenda driven...its the fact of the matter.It’s so crazy, they will stop at nothing to discredit anything Trump. How many weeks invested in this drug now?
This is just so factually untrue, it IS BEING HELD TO THE STANDARDS OF LITERALLY EVERY OTHER DRUG ADMINISTERED TO PATIENTS which is why no one in their right minds wants to widely use it to treat this based on 2 ####### months of limited trials. And for the record, if you read that sentence I wrote, there is absolutely nothing political about it.If you bother to look at the science, which of course you won't, you'd see that if it was held to the same standards as other drugs, not some cherry picked absurd standard, it's performing as well as any other.
as long as people keep replying, unfortunately no.Can we take the drug slap fight, err, discussion to another thread? Please?
It's so sad that being pro-science, pro-academia, pro-actually testing something before widely using it is seen as being anti-Trump but that's the state of it for you guys these days. God bless.Its not discrediting Trump...thats the point. The effectiveness of the drug is legitimately in question. That isn't agemda driven...its the fact of the matter.
Quit with the completely false narratives....and all the “they” crap.
Stunning that you would post this right now. A study literally cherry picked high risk patients and withheld the drug until it was too late as a way to try and discredit the drug and you're here saying it's being held to the same standard as others. Simply stunning.This is just so factually untrue, it IS BEING HELD TO THE STANDARDS OF LITERALLY EVERY OTHER DRUG ADMINISTERED TO PATIENTS which is why no one in their right minds wants to widely use it to treat this based on 2 ####### months of limited trials. And for the record, if you read that sentence I wrote, there is absolutely nothing political about it.
Sorry I won’t continue.Can we take the drug slap fight, err, discussion to another thread? Please?
No one study one way or another means anything right now. And saying that isn't discrediting Trump, it's saying we just don't know. Stop pretending you or anyone else does. It needs to be studied in much much greater detail and until it is, it's not political, it's nothing at all, it's one of dozens of maybes and it shouldn't even be a topic of discussion at this point.Stunning that you would post this right now. A study literally cherry picked high risk patients and withheld the drug until it was too late as a way to try and discredit the drug and you're here saying it's being held to the same standard as others. Simply stunning.
Because the discussion in here is inherently political and at this point in time pointless. No one knows. No one. Not you, not me, not Fauci, not Dr. Oz, not FoxNews, not Trump, not even the people who have conducted the limited, inconclusive testing that has come out and is being debated in here with no possible positive/conclusive resolution.When the facts shift, let's shut down the conversation. Par for the course. You people had no problem trashing this drug all day. 10 minutes after that bashing is exposed to be based on a fraudulent study and it's all "let's stop the discussion!"
Turns out they weren’t so bogus after all:Had they not started with the bogus Russian claims
Goalposts have always been the same, run it through the same level of standards and clinical testing/trials as every other drug on the market.:moving the goalposts:
Then why didn't you care when these people were ranting about how terrible this drug was all day? It didn't seem to bother you then. Now suddenly it's a discussion not fitted for this topic. What changed? Oh, that's right...Goalposts have always been the same, run it through the same level of standards and clinical testing/trials as every other drug on the market.
It's not terrible, it's unproven, which has been the point all along. Which should have been the point people were making in here today - it's what I said this morning but I haven't been in here all day.Then why didn't you care when these people were ranting about how terrible this drug was all day? It didn't seem to bother you then. Now suddenly it's a discussion not fitted for this topic. What changed? Oh, that's right...
You're right, I won't engage further.Hydroxychloroquine has proven to be the most effective drug to distract from actual discussion realted to Government Response To The Coronavirus. Side effects may vary. I get headaches and the urge to binge drink. Do not recommend.
How does one determine what "optimistic" is versus "too optimistic"?Opposed to someone who doesn’t know a darn thing about the drug and overly positive, almost obsessed about the drug?
What are your qualifications again? Mine include 4 years of schooling, a PharmD, a decade of working in a retail pharmacy, dispensing hundreds if not thousands of prescriptions for the medications and had several conversations with doctors about interactions and side effects of the drugs most centering around the very heart issues that have caused issues during use with COVID patients.
But no, I’m one of the people who doesn’t know anything about the drug. You can go back and look at my posting history and see that I consistently preached caution about being too optimistic about hydroxychloroquine’s use in COVID. I wish I was here apologizing for my skepticism because it saves thousands of lives but right now that doesn’t seem like the case.
And there is no need to respond, I won’t see it. I have you on ignore because your obsession with this drug made this thread very hard to read. I only saw your post because of the glitch in the software that has ignored posts show up with new posts. Move on, it’s over. This drug isn’t the savior you hoped it was. Find some other reason to not take it seriously. I’ve heard ‘it’s not as bad as the flu’ is making a comeback.
The side that is accusing Trump of having blood on his hands is now accusing the other side of using this for political purposes?It's not terrible, it's unproven, which has been the point all along. Which should have been the point people were making in here today - it's what I said this morning but I haven't been in here all day.
I know we won't agree on "which side" tried to run with it and score points for political purposes, and I can see asking you to wait for further clinical trials and testing before debating to the death for it is a lost cause, so yes, this conversation is going absolutely nowhere.
You are making false statements and don’t seem to understand facts and are cursing which Joe doesn’t appreciate. Be better.Its not discrediting Trump...thats the point. The effectiveness of the drug is legitimately in question. That isn't agemda driven...its the fact of the matter.
Quit with the completely false narratives....and all the “they” crap.
Nothing i stated was false...nor was there any cursing. Try again...You are making false statements and don’t seem to understand facts and are cursing which Joe doesn’t appreciate. Be better.
Slow news day for you?HHS chief Alex Azar tapped ex-professional Labradoodle breeder to coordinate the coronavirus response.
yes...you read that right.
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-hhschief-speci-idUSKCN2243CE
Yesterday was the highest number of deaths due to CV to date.outrage
Coming out of ignorant Trump’s mouth it it basically snake oil. Pretty much everything he says is gibberish.How does one determine what "optimistic" is versus "too optimistic"?
should Trump just be pessimistic about everything? Would that make you guys happy? Or would people just complain that he's always pessimistic and never optimistic?
From what I've seen, people have been optimistic about it. There is absolutely zero people saying this is a cure.
Mr anonymous himself has repeatedly said that this is not a cure but a possible treatment that we could be optimistic about. Yet, the mob continues accuse him of saying things he never said.
I appreciate your thoughts on this matter.
You don’t think he prioritized his ratings (and his re-election )?I raised the NBC story as a question, but nobody seems willing to discuss the details. A couple of Trump critics here seem to believe it’s true. A couple of Trump supporters called it fake news and one asserted that the New York Times can’t be trusted, which is a comment I don’t take seriously.
I also don’t take seriously anyone who believes that President Trump deliberately didn’t act in February because he cared more about his ratings and the stock market than he did about the health of the American people. I don’t like the man at all but that takes it too far. I think that based on what we know it sure sounds like he made a bunch of bad decisions. I don’t think he performed competently.
Is he performing competently now? I wrote this morning that I thought he was moving in the right direction. But his press conferences are so defensive, so full of nonsense that it’s impossible to tell for sure.
Are you being serious? This administration is a complete and total joke. Just tune into the daily briefings. Embarrassing.Slow news day for you?
What's next? You going to post a link about Trump not returning his VHS movies back to Blockbuster on time back in the day? That should really get the masses riled up. Keep the outrage going, that's what I say!
*****outrage
I agree with you that we're facing a tough dilemma. Lots of people are going to die regardless of what we do, so we're in a bit of a "trolley problem" situation.Football Jones said:At what point would we need to make the ugly decision to let Darwin take over? I'm talking about the nation & its people, as a whole.
Not acceptable posting.Football Jones said:I’m up for debate until people starting acting like a toddler.
Wow. Thank you. That’s very likely the best, most informative article I’ve read on this entire subject. I urge everyone here to read this in full.
You really need to stop talking, right now. This post is disgraceful. You have no idea what you are talking about and this is completely unhinged. Someone earlier mentioned insulting doctors in a context in which it didn't make sense, but this is a really insulting post. You should be ashamed of yourself.Lol at not seeing the clear agenda in that study. The family members of the patients have some serious questions they need to be asking. Not only is it scientific fraud, it might be criminal.
Trump shouldn't be optimistic or pessimistic about pharmacotherapies because he shouldn't say anything about it. Ever. He does not understand it and shouldn't be commenting on it.How does one determine what "optimistic" is versus "too optimistic"?
should Trump just be pessimistic about everything? Would that make you guys happy? Or would people just complain that he's always pessimistic and never optimistic?
From what I've seen, people have been optimistic about it. There is absolutely zero people saying this is a cure.
Mr anonymous himself has repeatedly said that this is not a cure but a possible treatment that we could be optimistic about. Yet, the mob continues accuse him of saying things he never said.
I appreciate your thoughts on this matter.
He may accidentally make a competent decision at some point. It's not because he analyzed the data and came to a conclusion on what was best for the country. He acts without contemplation and analysis based on what he thinks is best for himself in the moment. It's why he constantly reverses course. In the span of what, 4 days, we had "absolute authority", "leave it to the governors", "liberate Virginia, 2nd Amendment!!!", and "bad Kemp"?I raised the NBC story as a question, but nobody seems willing to discuss the details. A couple of Trump critics here seem to believe it’s true. A couple of Trump supporters called it fake news and one asserted that the New York Times can’t be trusted, which is a comment I don’t take seriously.
I also don’t take seriously anyone who believes that President Trump deliberately didn’t act in February because he cared more about his ratings and the stock market than he did about the health of the American people. I don’t like the man at all but that takes it too far. I think that based on what we know it sure sounds like he made a bunch of bad decisions. I don’t think he performed competently.
Is he performing competently now? I wrote this morning that I thought he was moving in the right direction. But his press conferences are so defensive, so full of nonsense that it’s impossible to tell for sure.
I agree with all of this. But in terms of good for the country, I think he honestly believes (if such a term can be applied to Donald Trump) that what’s good for him politically is good for the country.He may accidentally make a competent decision at some point. It's not because he analyzed the data and came to a conclusion on what was best for the country. He acts without contemplation and analysis based on what he thinks is best for himself in the moment. It's why he constantly reverses course. In the span of what, 4 days, we had "absolute authority", "leave it to the governors", "liberate Virginia, 2nd Amendment!!!", and "bad Kemp"?
I bolded one phrase above because I think it's beyond clear that his primary motivation is his own ratings and reelection, rather than the good of the country. There's an old saying, "When someone shows you who they are, believe them the first time."
Here's an Inc.com article, How to Tell if Someone is a Toxic Person
1. They badmouth someone else
2. They complain
3. They ask for special treatment
4. They boast
5. They put you on the defensive
6. They make you work to please them
7. They don't show interest in your concerns
8. They don't make you feel good
Trump manages to nail every single one of these in an average press conference.
Maybe, but if forced to make a choice, I'm confident I know which one he'd pick.I agree with all of this. But in terms of good for the country, I think he honestly believes (if such a term can be applied to Donald Trump) that what’s good for him politically is good for the country.
Another IG looking to get fired.SaintsInDome2006 said:An Inspector General of the HHS investigation has been triggered by Bright as part of his complaint.
It was false and cursing, please stop that behavior.Nothing i stated was false...nor was there any cursing. Try again...
As I recall, he had a 100% "success rate" with immediate treatment of his patients "with Covid-19 symptoms". NOT patients who tested positive, just patients with symptoms. So, patients who showed up with a cough get treated and don't die. When diagnosed patients have a 98% or so chance of survival and you're treating everyone who even thinks they might have it, you'd probably have a 99-100% success rate if you were giving your patients Tic Tacs. And not counting patients who didn't make it to 5 days on the drug skews the results even more--patients who actually developed more systems and were diagnosed and hospitalized despite starting treatment with him don't count in his totals, so it's like the French study that didn't include patients who died along the way.Got a bunch of people here who don't know a darn thing about these drugs, jumping on misleading news on them to serve a sick agenda. The doctor in New York who was touting his 100% success rate indicated that it came with people who made it to 5 days on the drug. He is using it as an immediate treatment. That's when it's most effective. And so it goes with every other drug - THEY'RE TREATMENTS, NOT CURES. All of them require early introduction to be of any positive use. None have shown an ability to bring people consistently back from the brink of death, though some have including hydroxychlorquine have done just that on occasion. Yet it's only hydroxychloroquine which is being measured by some very agenda driven people on how it performs as a last resort. They're saying a 60 year old drug with a very safe track record is too risky to introduce when the symptoms are manageable. By the time the roadblocks towards using it are removed, its odds of making a difference have cratered. Then when it inevitably fails to save everyone under those dire circumstances they shout out about it's spotty record. And that shouting is like drugstore candy for the media and people like shader. Newsflash - no drug is providing consistently good results when measured on how it performs as a last resort.
Like I said before, get the agendas and politics out of this. No drug in use has shown to be the magic cure. And when weighed equally, hydroxychloroquine is still the drug used by the most doctors. We all should just hope doctors reach a consensus on a drug soon and start administering it when it can do some good instead of keeping it from people early on because of an agenda.