Coronavirus: Continuing Vigilance

[Zoraptor]

At the moment the worst damage to, er, faith in science comes from deliberate politically motivated misrepresentation. Some from the Chinese, especially the local Wuhan authorities, and some from Trump types trying to cover their own arse. Plus some at least theoretically apolitical conspiracy theorising. A certain amount of charlatanism and snake oil selling is to be expected in any crisis, and it isn't like all scientists don't like money. I don't think it will matter if they come up with an effective vaccine.

Even without a full peer review you'd still have to make it past the editorial board or equivalent of a journal like The Lancet, and they should be able to pick up most fakes at that stage. The old joke- such a knee slapper, makes me smile just thinking about it- is that Gregor Mendel's work on genetics would not even have made it past a modern editorial board because his data was too perfect and they'd assume it was faked.

 

[MedicineDan]

It's funny that you mention Lancet, Zoraptor.  I haven't had time to play in the sandbox lately, but I saw this in a Medscape email just now and thought I'd post it.  I want to be clear, I'm not sold on Hydroxychloroquine.  It might have some benefit and it might not.  The animosity of the drug based solely on the fact that Donald Trump mentioned it is idiotic.  Anyhow, I don't think you need to be signed in to read this article.

https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/931539?src=mkm_covid_update_200601_mscpedit_&uac=295063MZ&impID=2403073&faf=1

 

Plus, last I read, my elite numbered friend mentioned that we should not draw equivalency between the immediate deaths due to Covid-19 and the increase in overall mortality over time.  We never act as if this is true.  Policy decisions virtually always balance harms.  The decisions about resources and restrictions balance immediate and long term effects all the time.  I bet in ten years, it will be determined that the length and severity of the lockdown will be considered worse than the Covid crisis in the first place.  I'm not one of the crazies who said we should do nothing.  Regional strict lock downs for two weeks to get an idea of the extent of the danger would have been perfectly reasonable.  Even extended localized lockdowns would have served a good purpose. The lockdowns as they have been handled in large swaths of this country?  Insanity.

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, MedicineDan said:

It's funny that you mention Lancet, Zoraptor.  I haven't had time to play in the sandbox lately, but I saw this in a Medscape email just now and thought I'd post it.  I want to be clear, I'm not sold on Hydroxychloroquine.  It might have some benefit and it might not.  The animosity of the drug based solely on the fact that Donald Trump mentioned it is idiotic.  Anyhow, I don't think you need to be signed in to read this article.

 

so medicine dan does wanna discuss hydroxy? didn't wanna discuss 'til he finds what appears to be a life preserver for trump? 'course the lifeline doesn't actual legitimize what is the irresponsible promotion by trump o' hydroxy, which medicine dan is still missing as the point o' the animosity o' trump's double-down behaviour as 'posed to any kinda misplaced anger at a drug.

again, anger weren't 'bout hydroxy but rather trump's initial reckless promotion o' an unproven drug which resulted in shortages for those people who genuine do benefit from the drug. when confronted with the lack o' scientific support for promoting an unproven drug simple to provide hope to the masses (is least skeevy argument in favor o' trump's promotion 'cause otherwise is worst kinda self-serving cronyism) trump doubled-down and increased the promotion o' hydroxy contemporaneous with being questioned 'bout every subsequent hydroxy study which appears to call its covid-19 benefits into question.

for chrissakes, the media, as a whole, did their freaking job insofar as hydroxy is concerned. the % o' americans who has any idea o' what is possible benefits and the subsequent side effects o' hydroxy in the treatment o' covid-19 patients at the time trump first promoted would be negligible. media sources did due diligence and presented facts o' covid-19 to understandable ignorant public. reasonable media then did responsible and asked the President why he would advocate so strong for hydroxy in spite o' so little scientific support while simultaneous observing the potential dangers o' promoting a drug not approved for treating. point out dr. fauci reservations is counting as hounding the President? observe shortages suffered by lupus patients is unfair? mention va studies and others which question hydroxy efficacy? how on earth does medicine dan see such as unreasonable? such questions is, paradoxical, only unreasonable 'cause the President doesn't have good responses. consider for a moment a change in reality: if trump had scientific data and preponderance o' expert support on hydroxy issues, such questions as medicine dan is seeming seeing as unfair would be labeled as softballs lobbed up to make trump look good. 

internet is only place we may have these kinda discussions. in rl we use understanding and empathy 'cause confront the obtuse with their unreasonable and irrational support o' trump behaviours does not promote constructive dialectic. such ineffectual understanding in the face o' rejection o' sound argument and clear facts is so exhausting. get to throw of shackles o' nice behaviour. 

medicine dan, and the like, will spin every trump criticism. why? question trump 'bout idiocy such as crowd size, cancer causing windmill sound and sharpie altered weather maps is inverted and becomes criticism o' liberal media hounding the President? and those is the minor lies and mistakes which trump promotes. is maddening. is madness. 

HA! Good Fun!

 

 

[MedicineDan]

Whatever Gromnir! This isn't about Trump for me, regardless of your wall of text.  This *is* about Trump for you.  You're fixated on Trump.  What I'm suggesting is that people wait for robust clinical trials of the drug.  There's a good chance that the news about the drug won't be important enough by the time sufficient clinical trials are conducted and vetted to warrant people talking about them either way.  If they indicate that the drug doesn't work, it won't matter because Trump will be out of office even if he gets a second term.  If it indicates the drug has therapeutic value, the media will largely ignore it.  Even Trump-friendly media won't spend a lot of time on something that amounts to old news.

Grom, I'm not defending Trump.  You're attacking him.  As with most liberals, you accuse me of exactly what you're doing.  You fixate on the president, not me.  This *is* madness, but of your making, not mine.  I promise, if it comes out that the drug lacks therapeutic value or, heaven forbid, actually causes more harm than good, I'll come back and own it. I'd say I'd eat my words, but I never said that it was good, only that I suspect it might have some benefits on the periphery.  I stated at the time that it was unwise for the president to make claims about the drug before it were vetted.  I stated that specifically because Trump taints every he touches now by and large because of crazies who use any stick with which to beat on him.

I stand by what I've said, which is entirely about the drug.  We should stop worrying about whether or not the president likes or dislikes it and allow actual research to happen.  God bless you Gromnir, but I hope I drive you crazy sometimes as much as you do me.  :Dan's half maddened/half laughing icon:

[Malcador]

2 hours ago, MedicineDan said:

  It might have some benefit and it might not.

Wow, you don't say.  Also why are you constantly framing yourself as defending a medication. 

[MedicineDan]

Yeah, probative, Mal.  Seriously, I'm not defending the medication.  I'm suggesting we not label the medication as something we haven't proved it is.  Why are we even debating the medication?  Would we have this same discussion about a medication that already had media coverage if Donald Trump hadn't mentioned it in a conference? If you believe that, you're a fool.  There were and are reasons to be skeptical about hydroxychloroquine.  We shouldn't take it for granted that it works.  However, the nature of the attacks became far more personal and less substantive the second that Trump made it politicized.  Is it Trump's fault he's so obnoxious that he draws fire on a constant basis?  Yeah.  Sure.  Do the people who have developed such hatred for him that they take every desperate avenue in order to attack him share in that blame.  Of course.

I'll give you this, like Gromnir, you take a narrow focus on a small line of text in order to attack a larger argument, but at least you don't take so long to do it.  As an aside, I think it's an effective tactic, so I can't help but admire it.  I agree with Gromnir in this: if we were in person, I think we'd still have heated arguments, but I think we'd also find it easier to generate some goodwill also.  Anyhow, I really do appreciate pushback on my ideas.  It's simply impossible to grow otherwise.  I *do* find some of the arguments frustrating, but that's probably a good sign.

EDIT:  just a few minor edits for clarity.

Edited June 2, 2020 by MedicineDan

[Gromnir]

1 hour ago, MedicineDan said:

 

Grom, I'm not defending Trump.  You're attacking him. 

complete inversion and you wouldn't accept such nonsense from others making such specious arguments, but you are embracing yourself.

Gromnir is pointing out trump errors and mistakes. converse, medicine dan is not defending substance o' arguments, but is instead attacking the motives o' Gromnir and others... which he knows is a logic fail and weak. even if you genuine believe a person is utterly partisan and indulging in obvious hypocrisy, that don't mean their argument is a fail. nevertheless, you has replaced perceived flaw in messenger with any attempt to refute arguments. all the trump criticisms fail, and medicine dan need not respond on merits, 'cause all those attacking trump is mean spirited. bah. nonsense.

am gonna give you perhaps more credit than you deserve and posit that you would never defend such intellectual flimflammery on any other issue save trump. 

"What I'm suggesting is that people wait for robust clinical trials of the drug."

that is exact what dr. fauci suggested and is at the heart o' the criticism o' trump regarding hydroxy. BEFORE promoting hydroxy and creating synthetic shortages o' a medicine which helps keep lupus patients alive, trump shoulda' waited for robust clinical trials. when trump were questioned as to why he were advocating untested drug insofar as covid-19 instead o' taking medicine dan advice, trump doubled-down. nevertheless, medicine dan is defending trump from those who has asked trump why he did not do as medicine dan suggest is the reasonable course o' action? madness indeed.

and no, you don't drive us crazy. sadly. am sad to say that medicine dan curious obtuseness on all things trump is just so... ordinary. never thought it would be ordinary, but have become numb to it. were initial curious to see such zealotry from the fox talking heads and from gun-toting crazies at (fill in the blank here with protest dujour whether it be white supremacists with tiki torches in virginia or confederate flag waving nutters fighting stay-at-home orders in michigan).  

not driven least bit crazy but am admitted disappointed 'cause am knowing medicine dan can be better.

HA! Good Fun!

Edited June 2, 2020 by Gromnir
changed "untested rug" to "untested drug."

[MedicineDan]

Aw well, bite me, you bastard!  lol  Okay, you've worn me down!  I'll have to come back and engage in the endless debate later.  I'll keep trying to drive you crazy, though.

[Malcador]

14 minutes ago, MedicineDan said:

Yeah, probative, Mal.  Seriously, I'm not defending the medication.  I'm suggesting we not label the medication as something we haven't proved it is.  Why are we even debating the medication?  Would we have this same discussion about a medication that already had media coverage if Donald Trump hadn't mentioned it in a conference? If you believe that, you're a fool.  There were and are reasons to be skeptical about hydroxychloroquine.  We shouldn't take it for granted that it works.  However, the nature of the attacks became far more personal and less substantive the second that Trump made it politicized.  Is it Trump's fault he's so obnoxious that he draws fire on a constant basis?  Yeah.  Sure.  Do the people who have developed such hatred for him that they take every desperate avenue in order to attack him share in that blame.  Of course.

But why should we care if people are making personal attacks on Trump ? He throws enough so let him catch. 

All the coverage I've seen has been with respect to it working against COVID which it hasn't been proven to work against reliably (first I heard of it was in when they had used in Italy but it seemed they were trying anything) or it is dangerous.  So not like the medication is threatened (as odd as that reads), if it does turn out to work well then medical staff will use it.   Media and Trump is a total sideshow to all of this. 

[Gfted1]

Black and Asian people in England more likely to die from COVID-19, says report.

[Volourn]

COVID 19 has been beaten. It is no longer  a threat. No need to be viilant about it now.   Millions of people  standing side by side and being encouraged to do so... this not longer after people were being arrested/fined/jailed/beaten because they dared to got o the park, open their stores, say hi to their neighbours. LMAO

 

 

[Gorgon]

umm, no it it hasn't, it's expected to come back, but they might have missed to point about priorities. The fear has gone, now that there isn't the threat of emergency services being overwhelmed - for the time being - that's the difference. 

You don't know what you don't know, the fog of war is the fog of war. And remember, it takes 3 weeks or so to see any change in the curve from specific events. 

[Zoraptor]

2 minutes ago, Gorgon said:

You don't know what you don't know, the fog of war is the fog of war.

Well, akshually...

"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know." -- Donald Rumsfeld

So sometimes you do know what you don't know.

[Gorgon]

luls

[Volourn]

This thread be should closed. COVID 19 HAS BEEN SQUASHED. LET'S ALL GO PARTY IN THE STREETS HOLDING HANDS AND MAKING OUT.

 

But, if you dare go to the park with your family... TO JAIL WITH YOU AND LOSE ALL YOUR BELONGINGS.

 

DEATH TO COVID19!

 

LONG LIVE FRESH AIR!

[Hurlshort]

I mean, the goal of all of this is to not overwhelm our medical system. The virus is here until we have a viable vaccine. But if we've slowed the spread enough, we can handle it until that vaccine arrives. We will see if it starts to spike again as we open back up.

[ComradeYellow]

As long as Covid-19 keeps killing people, it's still here.

Not to mention all this rioting greatly increases the chances of a second wave.

[Volourn]

Nah. My eyes don't lie. The gov't is allowing people to get together in large numbers all over the world so the gov't is showing me with actions that we have beaten COVID-19. Wasn't that long ago that authorities were raping, murdering, assaulting, fining, and inprisoning people who DARED go to the park and people wer echeering the police thugs who were pepetrating that scummery behavior.

[Skazz]

9 hours ago, Zoraptor said:

Well, akshually...

"There are known knowns. These are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns. That is to say, there are things that we know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns. There are things we don't know we don't know." -- Donald Rumsfeld

So sometimes you do know what you don't know.

Oh dear, I've gone cross-eyed

[ComradeYellow]

[Raithe]

And for that point of view...

Edited June 4, 2020 by Raithe

[Gfted1]

We'll have to ask Canada and France.

[Zoraptor]

The study we were talking about previous page in The Lancet has been withdrawn as the data cannot- or 'cannot'- be sent for independent peer review due to licensing/ privacy concerns. Or alternatively because it's a load of old bollocks. So we're back to status quo ante with HCQ not really doing much of anything at all about covid19 instead of it being actively dangerous and increasing risk.

[MedicineDan]

The real problem is that we don't have any substantiated studies.  That's been my whole point all along.  I mean, I expect another diatribe railing about how urging calm patience in letting research happen equates to loving Trump.  OMG!  I accidently uttered Voldemort's name.  Quick, sharpen you keyboards!   lol  Okay, I kid.  Well... maybe I'm a *little* serious.  Seriously, though, we have to wait for real research to be done to determine what impact, if any, some of these drugs have.  Hell, Remdesivir isn't thoroughly vetted either, although it looks promising.  I wish that Gilead Sciences were a little less involved in the research that pushed it ahead, but I understand that things were looking pretty desperate at the time.

The bad press that hydroxychloroquine received, contrary to my exchange with... Mal? *did* have an impact on research.  It dissuaded people from participating in trials for fear for their lives.  It caused the WHO to halt research.  :sigh: my point has *never* been and has never been stated that I think the drug works.  My point was and still is, it has been politicized in a way that has actually been counterproductive.  Solid research may still establish that hydroxychloroquine might be harmful to Covid-19 pateints.  It might establish that it's ineffective.  It might show that it is effective as either a stand alone medication or in combination with other drugs.

The point is, people in this thread have been making definitive statements about hydroxychloroquine that are simply not established.  It is no more dangerous in a general sense than a wide variety of medications in common use.  To claim it is a particularly dangerous medication is simply foolish.  Hell, *aspirin* is considerably more dangerous in more situations than hydroxychloroquine.  Any medication can be dangerous, including hydroxychloroquine.  The question for all medications is whether the therapeutic value is sufficient to overcome the risk.  I have *not* made definitive claims about the drug.  I have merely urged caution in believing initial media releases. I anticipate that my past comments, when read in their entirety, prove that.  The most I've done, and I still kind of feel this way, is that I would not be surprised if hydroxychloroquine were helpful for specific cases of Covid-19 (which I would call the periphery).  On the other hand, I would not be surprised if it did not.  Trump doesn't get the blame or the credit either way.  I mean, I wish he'd kept his mouth shut.  Then again, I really wish the haters would have had a little restraint also, but we don't live in that world.

I know I'm kind of setting up a bunch of angst by typing this, and I'm always prepared for some angst coming my way, but people should at least recognize that some of what I was saying about the research has been substantiated by legitimate and reputable organizations.  Hell, if I remember right, Lancet was the journal that published the study in the first place.  They certainly withdrew their support, but I think they actually retracted it.  I don't have time to look it up at the moment.

[Gromnir]

medicine dan pleads for restraint and caution, right up until there is any info which might lessen or legitimize trump's irresponsible promotion o' a drug untested for covid-19 treatment. suddenly feels chatty 'bout hydroxy. fact medicine dan can't or won't admit what he is doing is disheartening but not surprising. and still missing the point 'bout the real issue.

again, the answer to the question o' why media is beating trump on hydroxy is 'cause trump, instead o' being reasonable and letting science answer the question as to whether hydroxy has value for covid-19 treatment, keeps pushing and promoting. is no mystery. President should not have been promoting a drug untested for covid-19, particular as such promotion caused serious shortages for lupus patients. period. is no way to make trump the victim w/o twisting self in a hypocritical knot.

suggestion: do as you recommend for trump. trump's promotion were unwarranted and irresponsible. medicine dan defense o' trump is similar unwarranted and unreasonable. fact you can't or refuse to admit is symptomatic.  perhaps unaware, you are making same fail as trump. double-down does not help you anymore than it helps trump salvage his cancer causing sound from windmill claims or his sharpie altered weather maps.

elsa wants you to let it go.

HA! Good Fun!