Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
swordfish

The Coronavirus - a virus from eating bats, an accident or something sinister gone wrong?

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, foxbat said:

"It's shown very encouraging -- very, very encouraging early results. And we're going to be able to make that drug available almost immediately. And that's where the FDA has been so great. They -- they've gone through the approval process; it's been approved. And they did it -- they took it down from many, many months to immediate. So we're going to be able to make that drug available by prescription or states."

"Normally the FDA would take a long time to approve something like that, and it's -- it was approved very, very quickly and it's now approved, by prescription."

 

Except that it hasn't been approved by the FDA.

Hydroxychloroquine has been approved by the FDA for several years. Medical doctors throughout America are currently prescribing the drug and treating their patients.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Howe said:

Hydroxychloroquine has been approved by the FDA for several years. Medical doctors throughout America are currently prescribing the drug and treating their patients.

 

Approved for treatment and prevention of COVID-19.  Look at the President's statements and you can see that he's talking specifically about treatment for COVID, not in general for something else.

Geez, Rogaine's been FDA-approved too for many years, but not for contraception.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, foxbat said:

Approved for treatment and prevention of COVID-19.  Look at the President's statements and you can see that he's talking specifically about treatment for COVID, not in general for something else.

Geez, Rogaine's been FDA-approved too for many years, but not for contraception.

Hydroxychloroquine has been approved by the FDA. Medical doctors are permitted to prescribe the medication. Period.

Does anyone actually believe that medical doctors throughout the globe give a damn what a couple of libtards think on a high school football forum in Indiana?  

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Howe said:

Hydroxychloroquine has been approved by the FDA. Medical doctors are permitted to prescribe the medication. Period.

Does anyone actually believe that medical doctors throughout the globe give a damn what a couple of libtards think on a high school football forum in Indiana?  

Reporter: "Dr. Fauci, it was explained yesterday there has been promise with hydroxy-chloroquine, this potential therapy for people who are infected with coronavirus. Is there any evidence to suggest that, as with malaria, it might be used as a prophylaxis against COVID-19?"

Fauci: "The answer is no. And the evidence that you’re talking about, John, is anecdotal evidence. So, as the commissioner of FDA and the president mentioned yesterday, we’re trying to strike a balance between making something with a potential of an effect to the American people available, at the same time that we do it, under the auspices of a protocol that would give us information to determine if it’s truly safe and truly effective. But the information that you’re referring to specifically is anecdotal. It was not done in a controlled, clinical trial. So, you really can’t make any definitive statement about it."

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, foxbat said:

Reporter: "Dr. Fauci, it was explained yesterday there has been promise with hydroxy-chloroquine, this potential therapy for people who are infected with coronavirus. Is there any evidence to suggest that, as with malaria, it might be used as a prophylaxis against COVID-19?"

Fauci: "The answer is no. And the evidence that you’re talking about, John, is anecdotal evidence. So, as the commissioner of FDA and the president mentioned yesterday, we’re trying to strike a balance between making something with a potential of an effect to the American people available, at the same time that we do it, under the auspices of a protocol that would give us information to determine if it’s truly safe and truly effective. But the information that you’re referring to specifically is anecdotal. It was not done in a controlled, clinical trial. So, you really can’t make any definitive statement about it."

Dr. Fauci stated his opinion regarding evidence as a prophylaxis against COVID-19. Apparently doctors throughout the world do not give a shit what Dr. Fauci says as they continue to prescribe the medication to their patients. Dr. Fauci is just a man. He was an alarmist during the HIV outbreak as well. He is not the almighty.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Howe said:

Dr. Fauci stated his opinion regarding evidence as a prophylaxis against COVID-19. Apparently doctors throughout the world do not give a shit what Dr. Fauci says as they continue to prescribe the medication to their patients. Dr. Fauci is just a man. He was an alarmist during the HIV outbreak as well. He is not the almighty.

 

 

By all means, take as much as you want.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But....but....but....Dr. Fauci said the evidence of Hydroxychloroquine treating COVID-19 was anecdotal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Howe said:

But....but....but....Dr. Fauci said the evidence of Hydroxychloroquine treating COVID-19 was anecdotal.

 

I recommend double doses.

Share this post


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

But....but....but....Dr. Fauci said the evidence of Hydroxychloroquine treating COVID-19 was anecdotal.

 

You don't know what "anecdotal" means, do you? 

 

Here's what the CDC says ... https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/hcp/therapeutic-options.html

Due to higher in-vitro activity against SARS-CoV-2 and its wider availability in the United States compared with chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine has been administered to hospitalized COVID-19 patients on an uncontrolled basis in multiple countries, including in the United States. One small study reported that hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin reduced detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in upper respiratory tract specimens compared with a non-randomized control group but did not assess clinical benefit [7]. Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin are associated with QT prolongation and caution is advised when considering these drugs in patients with chronic medical conditions (e.g. renal failure, hepatic disease) or who are receiving medications that might interact to cause arrythmias.

Hydroxychloroquine is currently under investigation in clinical trials for pre-exposure or post-exposure prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, and treatment of patients with mild, moderate, and severe COVID-19. In the United States, several clinical trials of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection are planned or will be enrolling soon.  More information on trials can be found at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/external icon.

There are no currently available data from Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) to inform clinical guidance on the use, dosing, or duration of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection.  Although optimal dosing and duration of hydroxychloroquine for treatment of COVID-19 are unknown, some U.S. clinicians have reported anecdotally different hydroxychloroquine dosing such as: 400mg BID on day one, then daily for 5 days; 400 mg BID on day one, then 200mg BID for 4 days; 600 mg BID on day one, then 400mg daily on days 2-5.

4 minutes ago, gonzoron said:

I recommend double doses.

Heard it's best if you take it with "kool-aid."

  • Haha 1
  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is comical to watch those who suffer from Trump Derangement Syndrome pretend to know more than doctors. Perhaps medical professionals in New York, California and Washington should follow the advise of the GID medical pretenders. Those states are full of democrats and it would certainly reduce their votes in November.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, foxbat said:

You don't know what "anecdotal" means, do you? 

Libtards know words.....

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, BARRYOSAMA said:

Libtards know words.....

A libtard is typically a perfectly intelligent individual who suffers from Trump Derangement Syndrome. Libtards refuse to apply common sense and react to most situations with their emotional hatred of Trump. It is interesting to observe their reaction to a FDA approved drug while the virus is most prevalent in democratic strongholds.

  • Like 1
  • Disdain 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
11 hours ago, foxbat said:

Heard it's best if you take it with "kool-aid."

Nice.  Now certain GID members are advocating individuals kill themselves.  Is this what COVID-10 has driven the American populace to?

 

Edited by Muda69
  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

U.S. Needs Billions of New Masks to Combat Coronavirus. Feds Say It'll Take Up To 90 Days to Approve New Mask-Making Facilities.: https://reason.com/2020/03/24/america-needs-billions-of-new-masks-to-combat-coronavirus-federal-regulators-say-itll-take-months-to-approve-new-mask-making-facilities/

Quote

America is suffering from a shortage of almost everything it needs to combat the spread of COVID-19. Hospital beds, ventilators, gloves, and gowns are all in short supply.

That's particularly true of the N95 masks that help medical professionals avoid catching and spreading the virus as they tend to patients. The N95 designation refers to the ability of these masks to filter out 95 percent of airborne particles.

In early March, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) said that the country's stockpile of N95 masks was enough to meet about 1 percent of the three billion masks we would need during a true pandemic.

The pandemic is here now and so are the severe shortages.

...

Large mask makers say they are doing everything to ramp up production. Meanwhile, the medical establishment and some in the media are urging the Trump administration to invoke Cold War-era emergency legislation to force private manufacturers to make even more.

At the same time, government regulations are stifling the ability of manufacturers to set up new N95 mask production facilities—handicapping the private sector's ability to respond to the current crisis.

That response includes the Open PPE Project, a group of about 15 engineers, technologists, and others who are attempting to set up their own N95 mask production facility, which they hope can then be used as a model for other companies and organizations to copy.

"We're trying to source materials, design N95 masks, and mass produce them," says Matt Chisholm, a spokesperson for the project. "On top of that, we're hopeful that our learning will allow us to put the information out there for other people and groups to do exactly what we're doing to mitigate the supply chain problems of there not being enough masks."

The Open PPE Project is in the process of setting up its own manufacturing line in Michigan. Chisholm says that they just secured a source of blown polypropylene, a common material used in making N95 mask filters.

Chisholm declined to give a rough date for when the Open PPE project would be capable of churning out masks. However long it does take, he says, getting the necessary government approvals could add up to three extra months.

The production of N95 masks is regulated by the CDC's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH). Prospective makers of N95 masks must submit detailed written applications to NOISH, and send finished products to its Personal Protective Technology Laboratory for testing. NIOSH staff must also personally inspect new manufacturing sites before they're allowed to start pumping out masks.

Chisholm says regulators have told the Open PPE Project that getting agency approval could take anywhere from 45 to 90 days.

"The problem with that is that you have possibly 45 days to 90 days of product that could be used to save lives that is now sidelined," he says. Complicating things further, he continues, is that NOISH inspectors are under travel restrictions (as are most federal workers), potentially delaying approval even longer.

With shortages only likely to grow worse as the spread of COVID-19 accelerates, that means many healthcare workers are having to go without.

...

Go Big Government!

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Muda69 said:

Nice.  Now certain GID members are advocating individuals kill themselves.  Is this what COVID-10 has driven the American populace to?

 

I must have missed that. And it’s Covid-19, not Covid-10.

Share this post


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

I must have missed that. 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drinking_the_Kool-Aid

Quote

"Drinking the Kool-Aid" is an expression used to refer to a person who believes in a possibly doomed or dangerous idea because of perceived potential high rewards. The phrase often carries a negative connotation.

In recent years it has evolved further to mean extreme dedication to a cause or purpose, so extreme that one would "Drink the Kool-Aid" and die for the cause.

The phrase originates from events in Jonestown, Guyana, on November 18, 1978, in which over 900 members of the Peoples Temple movement died. The movement's leader, Jim Jones, called a mass meeting at the Jonestown pavilion after the murder of U.S. Congressman Leo Ryan and others in nearby Port Kaituma. Jones proposed "revolutionary suicide" by way of ingesting a fatal powdered drink mix laced with cyanide and other drugs which had been prepared by his aides.

 

7 minutes ago, gonzoron said:

And it’s Covid-19, not Covid-10.

My apologies.  I ran out of caffeine this morning.

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Howe said:

Dr. Fauci stated his opinion regarding evidence as a prophylaxis against COVID-19. Apparently doctors throughout the world do not give a shit what Dr. Fauci says as they continue to prescribe the medication to their patients. Dr. Fauci is just a man. He was an alarmist during the HIV outbreak as well. He is not the almighty.

 

 

In the infection and allergy medical field - he IS the almighty.  Dr. Fauci is the nation's leading doctor on this topic and his long time experience and position at NIAID and the White House Task Force will prohibit him ENDORSING something that has no solidly achieved data to support it.  He will need solid data before he can prescribe it wholesale, so he will remain to be a stick in the mud on this one, of course, but doctors will still pursue this treatment, especially if it has a history that nets good results. 

Anyone else getting tired of the NY Governor losing his mind over ventilators/respirators?  As of this morning, over 4,000 (additional to NY's current inventory) were delivered and yet he is asking for 26,000.  NYC has less than 16,000 confirmed cases to date......and less than 1/4 of those cases even need hospitalization.......

Cuomo has been pretty good through this pandemic, but he's losing my respect over this one......

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So far politicians have been acting as if only one side of the ledger matters.: https://reason.com/2020/03/25/trump-is-right-to-worry-about-the-cost-of-aggressive-covid-19-control-measures/

Quote

President Donald Trump is rightly worried that the "cure" for COVID-19—sweeping restrictions on travel, local movement, business activity, and work—could prove to be "worse" than the disease. That may already be true, because politicians have been acting as if only one side of this ledger matters.

Economists are predicting that the official response to the pandemic could lead to a downturn as bad as or worse than the Great Recession of 2008–09, which cost Americans an estimated $22 trillion. It is hard to see how a loss of that magnitude can be rationally justified.

When government agencies evaluate health or safety regulations, they routinely consider not only the number of deaths they might prevent but the cost of doing so. That makes sense, because finite resources spent to reduce one kind of risk, depending on the payoff, might better be spent or invested elsewhere, possibly in ways that would save more lives.

A rough calculation based on the "value of a statistical life" (VSL) that the Environmental Protection Agency uses to assess proposed regulations suggests that the cost of COVID-19 deaths in the worst-case scenario sketched by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), which assumes that containment and suppression efforts are largely ineffective, would be huge: on the order of $13.6 trillion. But if the economic projections are right, the cost of aggressive COVID-19 control measures will be substantially higher.

That comparison assumes government intervention will be completely successful at preventing those deaths, which is certainly not true, and it uses a VSL that is arguably excessive in this case, since COVID-19 fatalities are concentrated among the elderly, meaning fewer years of life lost on average. Furthermore, there are sound reasons to think that the worst-case scenario, which imagines 214 million infections (65 percent of the population) and 1.7 million deaths, is unrealistic.

The true case fatality rate (CFR) for COVID-19, although probably higher than the CFR for the seasonal flu (about 0.1 percent), is likely to be much lower than the rates suggested by the official numbers, which include only confirmed cases. Since COVID-19 symptoms are typically mild to nonexistent, the actual number of infections is bound to be much higher.

Taking that "denominator problem" into account, Assistant Secretary for Health Brett Giroir says, "the best estimates now for the overall mortality rate for COVID-19 [are] somewhere between 0.1 percent and 1 percent." Based on data from the cruise ship Diamond Princess, John Ioannidis, an epidemiologist and biostatistician at Stanford University, calculates that "reasonable estimates for the case fatality ratio in the general U.S. population vary from 0.05% to 1%."

The CDC's projection implies a COVID-19 CFR of 0.8 percent, near the high end of those ranges. And the scenario implausibly assumes that voluntary measures to curtail the spread of COVID-19, such as avoiding crowds, limiting social interactions, and paying extra attention to hygiene, have no impact on transmission.

There is a great deal of uncertainty about these projections, and public officials may think they are erring on the side of caution. But that is true only if you ignore the potentially devastating impact of disrupting economic transactions, shutting down businesses, and depriving millions of people of their livelihoods.

Ioannidis worries that if the CFR for COVID-19 is much lower than many people fear, "locking down the world with potentially tremendous social and financial consequences may be totally irrational." David Katz, founding director of the Yale-Griffin Prevention Research Center, favors a more carefully targeted approach that focuses on protecting the people who face the greatest risk, saying he is "deeply concerned that the social, economic and public health consequences of this near total meltdown of normal life…will be long lasting and calamitous, possibly graver than the direct toll of the virus itself."

In settling on an appropriate response to COVID-19, there are no easy answers. But wise policy starts by recognizing the tradeoffs that politicians so far have been inclined to ignore.

Agreed.   We can't continue like this much longer.  Tremendous economic damage has already been done.

 

  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Muda69 said:

So far politicians have been acting as if only one side of the ledger matters.: https://reason.com/2020/03/25/trump-is-right-to-worry-about-the-cost-of-aggressive-covid-19-control-measures/

Agreed.   We can't continue like this much longer.  Tremendous economic damage has already been done.

 

Are you a Ferengi? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Muda69 said:

Nice.  Now certain GID members are advocating individuals kill themselves.  Is this what COVID-10 has driven the American populace to?

 

Not really sure how you came up advocating individuals kill themselves.  I know that the typical MO is to attempt to puts words in the mouths of posters, but even if so, this one's a

image.png.8acc75a087ad4a552e2bc8ec4f5f7ee6.png

  • Thanks 1
  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, DanteEstonia said:

Are you a Ferengi? 

No. I'm a realist.

 

23 minutes ago, foxbat said:

Not really sure how you came up advocating individuals kill themselves. 

You used the phrase Chief, not I.  Read the commonly accepted definition of the phrase. No stretch there.

 

 

  • Disdain 2
  • Kill me now 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

White House, Congress agree on $2 trillion virus rescue bill: https://apnews.com/edd230801c0e181169915e67b1fd64c6

Quote

The White House and Senate leaders of both parties announced agreement early Wednesday on an unprecedented $2 trillion emergency bill to rush sweeping aid to businesses, workers and a health care system slammed by the coronavirus pandemic.

The urgently needed measure is the largest economic rescue bill in history. It is intended as a weekslong or monthslong patch for an economy spiraling into recession — or worse — and a nation facing a potentially ghastly toll.

“To the American people, we say, big help, quick help is on the way,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Wednesday morning on CNN.

Schumer said he expected approval by the Republican-led Senate later in the day.

That would leave final congressional approval up to the Democratic-controlled House. In a written statement, Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., said the bipartisan agreement “takes us a long way down the road in meeting the needs of the American people” but she stopped short of fully endorsing it.

“House Democrats will now review the final provisions and legislative text of the agreement to determine a course of action,” she said.

House members are scattered around the country and the timetable for votes in that chamber are unclear.

...

The sprawling, 500 page-plus measure is the third coronavirus response bill produce by Congress and by far the largest, building on earlier efforts focused on vaccines and emergency response, sick and family medical leave for workers, and food aid.

It would give direct payments to most Americans, expand unemployment benefits and provide a $367 billion program for small businesses to keep making payroll while workers are forced to stay home.

One of the last issues to close concerned $500 billion for guaranteed, subsidized loans to larger industries, including a fight over how generous to be with the airlines. Hospitals would get significant help as well.

“After days of intense discussions, the Senate has reached a bipartisan agreement on a historic relief package for this pandemic,” said Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., a key negotiator. “It will rush new resources onto the front lines of our nation’s health care fight. And it will inject trillions of dollars of cash into the economy as fast as possible to help Americans workers, families, small businesses and industries make it through this disruption and emerge on the other side ready to soar.”

Five days of arduous talks produced the bill, creating tensions among Congress’ top leaders, who each took care to tend to party politics as they maneuvered and battled over crafting the legislation. But failure was never an option, which permitted both sides to mark big wins.

Even before the deal was reached, news of the likely but elusive agreement had sent the stock market rocketing on Tuesday. The rescue package would be larger than the 2008 bank bailout and 2009 recovery act combined.

The package would give one-time direct payments to Americans — $1,200 per adult making up to $75,000 a year, and $2,400 to a married couple making up to $150,000, with $500 payments per child.

A huge cash infusion for hospitals expecting a flood of COVID-19 patients grew during the talks at Schumer’s insistence. Republicans pressed for tens of billions of dollars for additional relief to be delivered through the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the lead federal disaster agency.

Democrats said the package would help replace the salaries of furloughed workers for four months, rather than the three months first proposed. Furloughed workers would get whatever amount a state usually provides for unemployment, plus a $600 per week add-on, with gig workers like Uber drivers covered for the first time.

Schumer said businesses controlled by members of Congress and top administration officials — including Trump and his immediate family members — would be ineligible for assistance from receiving loans or investments from new Treasury programs. The New York Democrat immediately sent out a roster of negotiating wins for transit systems, hospital, and cash-hungry state governments that were cemented after Democrats blocked the measure in votes held Sunday and Monday to maneuver for such gains.

Republicans won inclusion of an “employee retention” tax credit that’s estimated to provide $50 billion to companies that retain employees on payroll and cover 50% of workers’ paychecks. Companies would also be able to defer payment of the 6.2% Social Security payroll tax.

Democrats pointed to gains for hospitals, additional oversight of the huge industry stabilization fund and money for cash-strapped states. A companion appropriations package ballooned as well, growing from a $46 billion White House proposal to more than $300 billion, which dwarfs earlier disasters — including Hurricane Katrina and Superstorm Sandy combined.

To provide transparency, the package is expected to create a new inspector general and oversight board for the corporate dollars, much as was done during the 2008 Troubled Asset Relief Program bank rescue, officials said.

At the White House on Tuesday, even as the public health crisis deepened, President Donald Trump expressed eagerness to nudge many people back to work in the coming weeks and held out a prospect, based more on hope than science, that the country could be returning to normal in less than a month.

“We have to go back to work, much sooner than people thought,” Trump told a Fox News town hall. He said he’d like to have the country “opened up and just raring to go” by Easter, April 12. But in a White House briefing later, Trump said that “our decision will be based on hard facts and data.”

Wonderful.  A massive amount of more government (aka taxpayer) debt  used for a government "solution".  The irony is this pending massive recession was 100% caused by the government (local, state, & federal) in the first place.

 The words "Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem."  spoken by Mr. Reagan at his inaugural address have never been more true than they are now.

 

  • Disdain 1
  • Kill me now 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Muda69 said:

 The words "Government is not the solution to our problem, government is the problem."  spoken by Mr. Reagan at his inaugural address have never been more true than they are now.

And he certainly did his part to prove it. The 80's sucked.

  • Thanks 1
  • Disdain 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, swordfish said:

Anyone else getting tired of the NY Governor losing his mind over ventilators/respirators?  As of this morning, over 4,000 (additional to NY's current inventory) were delivered and yet he is asking for 26,000.  NYC has less than 16,000 confirmed cases to date......and less than 1/4 of those cases even need hospitalization.......

Cuomo has been pretty good through this pandemic, but he's losing my respect over this one......

A humorous exchange between Andrew Cuomo and his brother on CNN.

Chris: Welcome the Governor of New York, of course my brother, Andrew Cuomo. Thank you for coming back.

Andrew: Mom told me I had to. I don't want to have total association with your show frankly because I don't need all that negativity.

Chris: What was the right move you have made so far and what was the wrong move?

Andrew: Closing everything down was the right decision. The worst decision, which is a lousy question by you, is probably coming on your show frankly. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...