Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Government Response To The Coronavirus


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, Henry Ford said:

Yep. The woman who made the video the removal of which is being decried as censorship by the right wing today, and which caused Don Jr. to be suspended from Twitter for posting it. She also threatened Facebook that Jesus would shut down Facebook’s servers if it doesn’t put her video back up.  Also she believes endometriosis is caused by women having dream sex with demons.  
 

Trump loves himself a quack doctor.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 25.2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Australia has had months of little to no community spread and even then it was confined to one state. By and large Australians are running around doing the right thing, sport was and is still hap

This is going to be a one off post because I don't want to get trolled or banned but if I were American, the context of Canada would be the biggest damning fact of how things have been handled in the

I am confident we are going to hit >750K deaths.  I think it might be a million.  I don't post a ton but I'm an ER doc in a big city. This is by far the worse I've seen since the pandemic star

4 minutes ago, BigSteelThrill said:

looks they formed to just push that idea. they began in june 2020.

they haven't published or posted a thing from any of the other findings. or any other research. or any other covid information what-so-ever.

This is a summary of 65 studies.  39 (typo above) were published/peer reviewed.

I don't follow.

They didn't begin in June 2020, they were finalized beginning June 2020?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, The General said:

Link

Link

:coffee:

 

 

I'm betting you didn't bother reading.  Among the 65 studies are those that had negative results.

Among the large number of positives, there is a pattern.  Can you spot it?

eta - also your links are part of my link :lmao:

Edited by matuski
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, matuski said:

I'm betting you didn't bother reading.  Among the 65 studies are those that had negative results.

Among the large number of positives, there is a pattern.  Can you spot it?

No why don’t you tell me?

Link to post
Share on other sites

@The General

Quote

 

Boulware et al., NEJM, June 3 2020, doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2016638 (Peer Reviewed)A Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19

COVID-19 cases are reduced by [49%, 29%, 16%] respectively when taken within ~[70, 94, 118] hours of exposure (including shipping delay). The tre

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The General said:

No why don’t you tell me?

I mean your links were part of mine, give it some effort?  In fact one reinforces the pattern.

Edited by matuski
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, The General said:

That hydro has no proven effectiveness one way or the other?

Nope. In fact almost all of the studies show that early (PrEP, PEP, etc) treatment shows high effectiveness.

Late treatment is mixed.

So really one way it appears highly effective (early).  The other not so much.

Edited by matuski
  • Thinking 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

@The General In fact your linked study is of particular interest.. look down the list and click on the comments:

Quote

 

Post Exposure Prophylaxis study   Source   Study Page

Boulware et al., NEJM, June 3 2020, doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2016638 (Peer Reviewed)

A Randomized Trial of Hydroxychloroquine as Postexposure Prophylaxis for Covid-19

COVID-19 cases are reduced by [49%, 29%, 16%] respectively when taken within ~[70, 94, 118] hours of exposure (including shipping delay). The treatment delay-response relationship is significant at p=0.002. PEP delayed treatment RCT.Currently this is the only study where we have evaluated the result as positive while the authors indicate it is negative. We provide a detailed explanation of why the results presented here are positive [1]. Note that author comments also differ from the published conclusion.
 

[1] c19study.com/boulware.html

 

The bar graph is telling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, The General said:

Why would the author indicate it was negative?

I imagine if you take the data as a whole (including the late administering of HCQ), the average may come out as indifferent.  I am spit balling.

But as you can see, their own data shows significance (p=.002) between early and late.

Edited by matuski
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, matuski said:

They also note that this is the only study they encounter a discrepancy between themselves and the authors.  Kinda weird.

That does seem weird but I’d go with the people who did the study and released the findings in reaching a conclusion.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The General said:

Trump: "They're very respected doctors. There was a woman who was spectacular in her statements about it and she's had tremendous success with it."

Reporter: "She's also made videos saying that doctors make medicine using DNA from aliens." 

Trump: "I know nothing about her”
 

I missed his press conferences actually. Like real life VEEP episodes.

They are very respected doctors who he knows nothing about?

  • Laughing 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, The General said:

Trump: "They're very respected doctors. There was a woman who was spectacular in her statements about it and she's had tremendous success with it."

Reporter: "She's also made videos saying that doctors make medicine using DNA from aliens." 

Trump: "I know nothing about her”
 

I missed his press conferences actually. Like real life VEEP episodes.

My wife loves/loved VEEP.  

I watching remember the first season (2012?) and thinking it was great.  But I also thought it was a little over the top. Meaning the jokes came way too fast and it blurred the line between satire and farce.  I think I remember telling my wife “this is funny but it is pretty outlandish”.

I sit corrected.

  • Sad 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, OrtonToOlsen said:

My wife loves/loved VEEP.  

I watching remember the first season (2012?) and thinking it was great.  But I also thought it was a little over the top. Meaning the jokes came way too fast and it blurred the line between satire and farce.  I think I remember telling my wife “this is funny but it is pretty outlandish”.

I sit corrected.

Yup. When he speaks if given a few minutes he will say something completely bizarre. Every time. It’s pretty impressive. 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, urbanhack said:

Unreal. And some people here still think he’s doing a good job and has no responsibility for the deaths caused by Covid.

He's such a narcissistic baby. He's concerned about approval ratings compared to a doctor.

Nobody likes me

President Donald Trump said Tuesday his relationship with Dr. Anthony Fauci is "very good" but wondered why the doctor's approval rating is so high when his is so low.

Speaking a day after he retweeted a message claiming Fauci had misled the public, Trump chalked up his own sinking numbers to his personality.

But he said Fauci's broad respect should transfer to the Trump administration -- for whom Fauci works.


"I get along with him very well and I agree with a lot of what he's said," Trump insisted.

"It's interesting: he's got a very good approval rating. And I like that, it's good," he went on. "Because remember: he's working for this administration. He's working with us. We could have gotten other people. We could have gotten somebody else. It didn't have to be Dr. Fauci. He's working with our administration. And for the most part we've done what he and others -- and Dr. Birx and others -- have recommended."

Trump continued: "And he's got this high approval rating. So why don't I have a high approval rating with respect -- and the administration -- with respect to the virus? We should have it very high."

"So it sort of is curious," Trump said, "a man works for us, with us, very closely, Dr. Fauci and Dr. Birx also, very highly thought of -- and yet, they're highly thought of, but nobody likes me?"

"It can only be my personality, that's all," he said

Edited by gianmarco
  • Thinking 1
  • Sad 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, matuski said:

Nope. In fact almost all of the studies show that early (PrEP, PEP, etc) treatment shows high effectiveness.

Late treatment is mixed.

So really one way it appears highly effective (early).  The other not so much.

So then why isn’t every country offering it up to help fight the coronavirus? I’ve seen so much fake information on this topic, so I’m genuinely interested. If studies say that it seems to work for a decent percentage of people, then why aren’t we and other countries giving it to everyone?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Bucsfan5493 said:

If studies say that it seems to work for a decent percentage of people, then why aren’t we and other countries giving it to everyone?

To hurt Donald Trump's reelection. 

  • Like 1
  • Laughing 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Mile High said:

To hurt Donald Trump's reelection. 

This is the only reason I’ve heard from Republicans and Trump supporters. I have a very hard time believing that thousands of doctors and other countries are all in on the ploy to kill more of their citizens just to give Trump a worse chance at getting re-elected.

I believe matuski is not a Trump supporter so I’m wondering if he has a legit reason on why the drug wouldn’t be given out widespread if it truly helps.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, The General said:

That does seem weird but I’d go with the people who did the study and released the findings in reaching a conclusion.

Again though, even if you debate the one point.....

This is a review of 64 others as well.  It is eye opening, you seem resistant to it.

Political reasons?

Edited by matuski
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, parasaurolophus said:

Bloomberg??? lol 

He's a weird guy. Trump often points out the news orgs the reporter hails from to presage any question with an implication of bias, and Bloomberg is one of them. Here Trump added to it with the stupid joke that the guy looked like Mike Bloomberg (and obviously he's black), just weird.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
Link to post
Share on other sites

Rep. Louie Gohmert has Covid19.

- He learned of it from a screening at the White House.

- He was at yesterday's Barr hearing, maskless.

eta - Apparently he met with the President and GOP lawmakers at the WH. (I guess they let him meet before the screening was complete).

Edited by SaintsInDome2006
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Loved hearing Biden was asked what he would do regarding COVID if he was the President and he goes on to list everything Trump is already doing.  :lol:  Classic.  

Those complaining about the government response have no legs to stand on.  We are doing almost everything correct.

  • Laughing 9
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Don't Noonan said:

Loved hearing Biden was asked what he would do regarding COVID if he was the President and he goes on to list everything Trump is already doing.  :lol:  Classic.  

Those complaining about the government response have no legs to stand on.  We are doing almost everything correct.

Let me guess...it didn't go down just like this.

And the point is probably more...what he would have done...because the response at the beginning was what was in question more than what is being done currently.   And you know that...but chose to just ignore it?

  • Laughing 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SaintsInDome2006 said:

Rep. Louie Gohmert has Covid19.

- He learned of it from a screening at the White House.

- He was at yesterday's Barr hearing, maskless.

eta - Apparently he met with the President and GOP lawmakers at the WH. (I guess they let him meet before the screening was complete).

Hello, karma, my old friend.

 

This is no joke.  And the sooner we get people off the conspiracy sites, and into reality, the better.  I hope Gohmert has a full recovery - and I hope that many non-believers have a change of heart/attitude/behavior.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, matuski said:

Again though, even if you debate the one point.....

This is a review of 64 others as well.  It is eye opening, you seem resistant to it.

Political reasons?

I’m not a doctor and don’t know how to interpret this stuff. That no one from the republican news  side makes this point tends to make think that it is not a strong argument for it. 

Fauci just the other day repeated something to the effect that there is no clinically proven benefit.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Don't Noonan said:

Loved hearing Biden was asked what he would do regarding COVID if he was the President and he goes on to list everything Trump is already doing.  :lol:  Classic.  

There is an easy way to check your work.

The Biden Plan To Combat Coronavirus

  • wide availability of free testing
  • elimination of all cost barriers to preventive care and treatment for COVID-19
  • full deployment of necessary supplies
  • decisive economic response that starts with emergency paid leave for all those affected by the outbreak
  • Immediately restore the White House National Security Council Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense

Plus lots and lots of other things not currently being implemented by the Trump administration.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, The Gator said:

Hello, karma, my old friend.

 

This is no joke.  And the sooner we get people off the conspiracy sites, and into reality, the better.  I hope Gohmert has a full recovery - and I hope that many non-believers have a change of heart/attitude/behavior.

I wish I were making this up:

 

.@replouiegohmert: "I can’t help but wonder if by keeping a mask on and keeping it in place, if I might have put some… of the virus on the mask and breathed it in”

  • Laughing 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, The Gator said:

I wish I were making this up:

 

.@replouiegohmert: "I can’t help but wonder if by keeping a mask on and keeping it in place, if I might have put some… of the virus on the mask and breathed it in”

He can't help but wonder if he might have breathed the virus out and then breathed it back in again?

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, [scooter] said:

There is an easy way to check your work.

The Biden Plan To Combat Coronavirus

  • wide availability of free testing
  • elimination of all cost barriers to preventive care and treatment for COVID-19
  • full deployment of necessary supplies
  • decisive economic response that starts with emergency paid leave for all those affected by the outbreak
  • Immediately restore the White House National Security Council Directorate for Global Health Security and Biodefense

Plus lots and lots of other things not currently being implemented by the Trump administration.

I'm sure the Biden admin would create a new department to be better prepared for future pandemics. I'd be curious to understand how much impact not having that in place would have changed our current circumstances.  

We're now testing between 750 and 850K most days and they claim to have a stockpile of all necessary supplies. It does concern me that a very simple question (do we have enough supplies) results in two different answers so would like to understand if we are currently prepared for the fall, and, if not, what actions are being taken to prepare.

One thing I've heard both Biden/Trump talk about, but don't recall seeing any specifics is reducing our supply chain dependency on China. Is that even realistic? Who's pushing this more and how? This would be a #1 issue for me. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, cubd8 said:

I'm sure the Biden admin would create a new department to be better prepared for future pandemics. I'd be curious to understand how much impact not having that in place would have changed our current circumstances.  

You mean staff the various positions that had already existed?  That had already had created a play book?  That had us the "most prepared" nation for such a thing?  Until the jobs were eliminated.

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Green Balloons said:

We're sadly to a point where public safety isn't going to be a priority until prominent science skeptics start getting sick or even die.  Trump years really are the Dark Ages. 

To be fair, he's a symptom not the cause. Though he's certainly made things worse.

But this is the result of decades of anti-intellectualism. We've seen it for years with global warming.

Currently, 58% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say colleges and universities have a negative effect on the way things are going in the country, while just 36% say their effect is positive,

58%. That's just insane.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, The Gator said:

I wish I were making this up:

 

.@replouiegohmert: "I can’t help but wonder if by keeping a mask on and keeping it in place, if I might have put some… of the virus on the mask and breathed it in”

Sure, you can put on a mask, but it doesn’t help if you lick the mask.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...