Coronavirus Outbreak...

[NorrinRadd]

Since you still question whether corona is worse than the common flu you must think the cure is worse... You must think Trump has gone way too far already...

I certainly think governors like my own Dear Leader Wolf have been allowed to go too WAY too far.

"Common" flu aside, this article I linked previously notes that, adjusted for current population, the Spanish Flu would have killed over 2 million, similar to the worst-case forecast for the Kung Flu.

[NorrinRadd]

A day or so ago, someone posted that six-minute video of that E.R. doc whose direct hands-on experience in multiple cases showed that the Kung Flu is not actually causing pneumonia (contrary to what images of the lungs suggest), and that ventilators do not help, and may actually harm.

Here is an article that reiterates that claim and gives more explanation as to what is really occurring.

[little_monkey]

While Hillary was secretary of state, Fauci sent her emails mentioning how much he loved her. Seriously.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]44042[/ATTACH]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]44043[/ATTACH]

https://theconservativetreehouse.com...ical-dr-fauci/

I actually came across this weeks ago but didn't think much of it because Trump tends to pick people based on their qualifications and isn't much concerned with any personal differences he might have with them. While this seems to work well enough in the business world where everybody has the same agenda (that is, make money), it doesn't work so well in politics, and I'm not sure why Trump hasn't seemed to figure that out.

All we need now is for someone to post pictures of Trump and Epstein, showing how close they were in the past. When will this infantile behavior stop?

[oxmixmudd]

To be clear, that article is in no way by or about Tucker Carlson. I mentioned him more as a contrast, because, at least at the time I wrote that, he was speaking more gently and non-politically about Fauci than did the author of that article. (I did not see Tucker's subsequent program, so I don't know if that has changed.) Apparently you did not bother to so much as skim the article. Perhaps I'm not the one "shooting from the hip," or, in Scriptural terms, "To answer before listening -- that is folly and shame." (Prov. 18:13)

Regarding HCQ, Trump and Tucker did not just pull the idea out of their respective hindparts. Nor did Laura Ingraham. It is being *widely* used and recommended by doctors worldwide. Many doctors themselves are using it prophylactically. If there's anything wrong with the way Bad Orange Man is recommending it, it is that he's saying, "Hey, if you're dying, what have you got to lose?" But the fact is, infectious disease expert Dr. Stephen Smith (one of Laura's go-to guys) has observed that results are better when it is used *early* in the course of the illness, rather than waiting until things are desperate. Dr. Oz has been recommending it for weeks; he had been quite deferential to Fauci's cautiousness (to use a euphemism), until a day or so ago.

And none of this has anything to do with the article itself. The point of the article is that the author has observed Fauci's methodology and personal associations for over 30 years, and found him to be a committed leftist.



To agree with you? I pray God that I *never* learn that!

No, I didnt read the article. I was addressing the general conservative follow Trump off a cliff tendency to reject anything that in any way contradicts him, regardless of what is true.

Just the idea that you would care more about Fauci's potential political leanings than his qualificstions as a medical doctor makes my point rather triumphantly. Only true ignorance values ideology over knowledge, personal loyalty over Truth.

And that is especially true when it comes to disease. Knowledge, or the lack of it, is the difference between life and death.

[oxmixmudd]

All we need now is for someone to post pictures of Trump and Epstein, showing how close they were in the past. When will this infantile behavior stop?

Probably never. We are looking at life and death here now and yet they still prefer partisan games and ideological fantasies over knowledge and truth.

[Charles]

Being a doctor Fauci's only concern is going to be the medical issues surrounding the pandemic, just like an economist is going to focus on the economic issues. As president, Trump has the unenviable job of walking the razor's edge between the two.

If only that big challenge was the only challenge. Trump also has to deal with his own previous false statements af failure to understand the situation. But I guess even that is something he has got "under control". Or at least some of you are willing to find a way to support whatever statement he might come up with.

[carpedm9587]

I honestly don't know why Trump picked him the first place. Did he not do a background check prior? If anything, there was an obvious political conflict of interest. It seems the person who wrote the article NR linked to had more info on this guy than they did.

What do you mean "picked him?" Dr. Fauci has been director of the NIAID since 1984, so he moved into that position during the Reagan administration. Do you mean on the task force? Seems a bit odd to NOT have the director of the NIAID on the task force, especially given his history and obvious capabilities. And I submit that politics is not the primary metric, IMO, for responding to a medical crisis.

But many on the right are doing to Mr. Fauci what they have done to so many others: attack a previously well-respected and honorable person because they had the audacity to contradict or speak out against Mr. Trump. Kelly. Mattison. Vindmann. Mueller. The list goes on. This is one of the many dynamics that convinces me what was once a political party (Republican) and political leaning (conservative) has now become a cult following.

[carpedm9587]

I hope he stays, but takes a diminished role. I'd like to see Bad Orange Man add a few more experts with views contrary to Fauci's, and elevate them to at least equal to Fauci and Birx in rank.

Fauci is a legitimate expert and his input can be valuable. But his focus is too narrow (infectious disease), and his approach is too inclined toward researcher as opposed to clinician. He needs to be balanced more by experts who are interested in actually treating the disease NOW, and by experts on the mental and physical health effects of quarantine, unemployment, etc.

He has been ignorantly dismissive of both HCQ therapy (seeming to conflate "not conclusively proven" with "no evidence at all") and the dangers of shutdown and lockdown ("inconvenient").

On the latter we disagree. There are a limited number of ways we can control this pandemic, and data-backed likely outcomes if we do not. There are myriad ways we can address the impact of a lockdown on the economy to mitigate the short-term damages and mitigate or even eliminate the long-term ones. Despite all of the speculation about negative impacts of a 12-18-month shutdown on lives, there is not a single thing that has been said to make me think any of those worst-case possibilities are even probable.

I favor continuing to fight the pandemic while turning attention to supporting those most impacted and finding creative strategies to mitigate the impacts.

[Sparko]

Fauci is looking at this as a scientist. He wants clinical studies to prove treatments are working. He has also said many times that doesn't mean he is telling doctors or anyone that these treatments don't work or not to use them. He said that doctors are free to use the treatments as they see fit, while at the same time they will be running clinical trials.

So this whole division thing is artificially created nonsense. The MSM and the Conservative paranoids are both claiming that Fauci is against Hydrochloroquine and Trump, while the facts are he is not. Trump is just being optimistic and Fauci is trying to be more reserved and wants to wait for the data, but he isn't stopping or advising anyone not to use the treatments they want to.

[carpedm9587]

All we need now is for someone to post pictures of Trump and Epstein, showing how close they were in the past. When will this infantile behavior stop?

I don't think it's going to. It has become standard operating procedure. We could quickly find quotes from Trump (and I did) from before 2015 in which he lavishly praised Hillary. By this argument, Trump is pro-Hillary and has a leftist agenda. The same can be said for many current leaders in the GOP.

But Hillary is widely hated, so linking anyone they want to undermine or discredit to her is an effective tactic to rally Trump's base. That it is done inconsistently (many people they do NOT currently attack could be similarly linked) is not of concern to anyone that I can tell: it works. That's all that counts.

[carpedm9587]

A day or so ago, someone posted that six-minute video of that E.R. doc whose direct hands-on experience in multiple cases showed that the Kung Flu is not actually causing pneumonia (contrary to what images of the lungs suggest), and that ventilators do not help, and may actually harm.

Here is an article that reiterates that claim and gives more explanation as to what is really occurring.

I've done a bit of backtracking. This article is widely disseminated on far-right websites, blogs, and social media, and many well-known conspiracy sites. AFAICT, it has zero presence anywhere in the medical literature nor has it been reported in any mainstream news outlet. If it has, I cannot find it.

As best I can tell, it was written by Mycahya Eggleston who appears to be a Photolithography Engineer (i.e., he designs/makes very small electronics).

I am dubious.

[rogue06]

All we need now is for someone to post pictures of Trump and Epstein, showing how close they were in the past. When will this infantile behavior stop?

So close that Trump immediately banned him from his properties when an underage staffer at Mar-a-Largo complained about his accosting her. So close that Trump was the only one of Epstein's high-profile associates to fully cooperate with the Florida investigation, for which the lawyer for Epstein's victims expressed his gratitude.

Darn those inconvenient facts and how they get in the way of your vitriolic nonsense smiley fist shake.gif

[carpedm9587]

Fauci is looking at this as a scientist. He wants clinical studies to prove treatments are working. He has also said many times that doesn't mean he is telling doctors or anyone that these treatments don't work or not to use them. He said that doctors are free to use the treatments as they see fit, while at the same time they will be running clinical trials.

So this whole division thing is artificially created nonsense. The MSM and the Conservative paranoids are both claiming that Fauci is against Hydrochloroquine and Trump, while the facts are he is not. Trump is just being optimistic and Fauci is trying to be more reserved and wants to wait for the data, but he isn't stopping or advising anyone not to use the treatments they want to.

Agreed. If the director of the NIAID went on record promoting an untested and unstudied treatment methodology, he would be failing to do his job. And it is very likely that clinicians would follow the advice with unpredictable/unknown results. Our medical community should be making decisions based-on science and data, not the "gut feel" of someone with no medical training whatsoever. When options become limited, doctors become more likely to try a "Hail Mary" to save a patient, and in that process we may find previously unknown treatment options. But even those need to be studied and verified to ensure that the cure does not become worse than the condition.

I can't believe I actually wrote those final words...

[Sparko]

I've done a bit of backtracking. This article is widely disseminated on far-right websites, blogs, and social media, and many well-known conspiracy sites. AFAICT, it has zero presence anywhere in the medical literature nor has it been reported in any mainstream news outlet. If it has, I cannot find it.

As best I can tell, it was written by Mycahya Eggleston who appears to be a Photolithography Engineer (i.e., he designs/makes very small electronics).

I am dubious.

I found this:

https://chemrxiv.org/articles/COVID-...hyrin/11938173

[carpedm9587]

I found this:

https://chemrxiv.org/articles/COVID-...hyrin/11938173

First, ChemRxIV is a preprint service for unpublished chemistry papers. Anyone can subscribe and anyone can upload an article. It says nothing about the veracity of the article, does not say anything about the credentials of its author, and it does not it in any way imply the paper has been peer-reviewed. The most they do is screen articles for plagiarism, offensive language, and non-scientific content. In other words, it's a document sharing site making it just another form of social media.

Second, this paper actually contradicts the other one - noting that there actually IS a pneumonia caused by Covid-19. It's in the first line of the article.

Finally, the article goes on to outline how chloroquine could be used to ease the symptoms of respiratory distress. If it proves to be correct, it suggests chloroquine is indeed a treatment option for Covid-19 and constitutes the first documentation of this in a formal study that I am aware of. It's encouraging, but needs to be replicated and peer reviewed. Until then, it certainly gives clinicians a basis for using this option when they are running out of options.