Saturday Night Fight

[Ricky C]

Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19 diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

--

Rick C.

- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:

Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

 

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.

This is funny:

https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/04/05/reporters-without-masks-grill-trump-about-not-wearing-a-mask/

Sounds like the only sensible person was behind the podium.

About Hydroxychloroquine, he said let's try it, we've got nothing to
lose. About masks, he said wear one if you want to.

I haven't seen a lot of marauding or rioting around here. People would
rather walk their dogs.





--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 06/04/20 16:42, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.

He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

 

On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 12:27:58 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 06/04/20 16:42, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.


He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

It's not disgraceful, the president was absolutely correct -- the
question has been asked and Dr. Fauci has answered it over, and
over, and over. It's petty, we're all sick of it, and it's
wasting everyone's time.

The president's mortal sin was highlighting a possible treatment.
We also announced, Jan. 20th, that NIH was already working
on a Coronavirus vaccine. And, the first U.S. patient was treated
with an anti-viral, remdesivir, expedited trials of which are
on-going.

Rather than deliver useful information to the American public all
the press can do is try to play a childish, vicious game of 'gotcha,'
rather than jump on board and try to suggest, discover, root out,
and otherwise look for other possibly life-saving treatments.

Proving the Orange Man is Bad is more important to them than doing
their actual job (informing the public), or, heaven forfend, helping.

That's the disgraceful thing.

They're petty, mean-spirited, small-minded, nasty little
virtue-signalers, not particularly bright.

Cheers,
James Arthur

 

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 17:27:53 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 16:42, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.


He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

Not trying all feasible anti-virals ASAP is disgraceful.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc

Science teaches us to doubt.

Claude Bernard

 

jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote in
news:ibpm8ft3sc1dmf63ut9rfr3aafute2lf46@4ax.com:

Not trying all feasible anti-virals ASAP is disgraceful.

Are you going to volunteer up, Mr. Pig?

First, we'll hit you with a HUGE aeresolized viral load to gulp a
few deep breaths of. Ensuring, of course, that you get it, so we can
be sure of the efficacy of the proposed cure.

Then, we can either try something, OR wait until you are soon to be
heading for a crematorial urn to try one or more out.

Post a YouTube video of the entire 'experiment' in time lapse.

No need to munge your face... you're a potential hero.

We could even have Trump tout you up in his daily mini-rallies he
has crafted for us all.

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 06/04/20 18:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 17:27:53 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 16:42, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.


He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

Not trying all feasible anti-virals ASAP is disgraceful

So when are you going to emulate the two possibilities
advocated by other countries leaders, e.g...

Some leaders from Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu
nationalist party have advocated cow urine or cow dung
for its "medicinal" properties.
https://www.dw.com/en/hindu-group-hosts-cow-urine-drinking-party-to-ward-off-coronavirus/a-52773262

Or the Indian prime minister from the 70s:
https://www.freepressjournal.in/cmcm/morarji-desai-the-former-indian-prime-minister-who-practiced-urine-therapy

 

[Winfield Hill]

John Larkin wrote...

If anything is a potential anti-viral, and is known to
be reasonably safe, it should be tried on sick people
immediately, enough to have some statistical value.

John, believe me, it has been, and it is. Thousands
of individual doctors have and are adding it to their
treatments. As Fauci said, they're free to use it
"off label". I read details of someone just admitted
to MGH (the premier teaching hospital in Boston, if
not the U.S.), and the treatment description included
hydroxychloroquine. Problem is, it's well known that
it doesn't work very well, if at all. That's what the
doctors who are using it say. And multiple studies as
well. But it certainly is being tried again and again
anyway. What we need to concentrate on, is a decent
therapeutic, that actually WORKS, and works well.


--
Thanks,
- Win

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 06/04/20 20:04, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 18:49:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 18:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 17:27:53 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 16:42, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.


He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

Not trying all feasible anti-virals ASAP is disgraceful

So when are you going to emulate the two possibilities
advocated by other countries leaders, e.g...

Some leaders from Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu
nationalist party have advocated cow urine or cow dung
for its "medicinal" properties.
https://www.dw.com/en/hindu-group-hosts-cow-urine-drinking-party-to-ward-off-coronavirus/a-52773262

Or the Indian prime minister from the 70s:
https://www.freepressjournal.in/cmcm/morarji-desai-the-former-indian-prime-minister-who-practiced-urine-therapy


You are being obnoxious on purpose. Dumb too.

Obnoxious isn't the right word. Confrontational, to illustrate
where that chain of thought can lead - yes, guilty.

If anything is a potential anti-viral, and is known to be reasonably
safe, it should be tried on sick people immediately, enough to have
some statistical value. At a small risk of harming a small number of
people, we have a decent chance of saving thousands (or billions?)

What good would a couple years of careful clinical trials and peer
review do?

A very smart person said we have nothing to lose.

Who was that?

How would you react if, when you were grossly overloaded
creating a product, a politician told you to include parts
that you've previously rejected as being a poor fit?

I wouldn't give them a polite answer.

We used to do that sort of math, trade some risk for a big payoff, in
the past. Lately people are afraid to take any risk, which is itself a
huge risk. Get some sick people to volunteer. Let prisoners elect to
volunteer to test a drug in exchange for pardons.

Let grownups decide to take chances. Save some lives.

If everybody goes off and does random uncontrolled things,
then it will be more difficult to sort the wheat from
the chaff.

Note that does not imply that initial trials take years.
It does imply some loose recording and control.

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:22:19 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 12:27:58 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 06/04/20 16:42, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.


He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

It's not disgraceful, the president was absolutely correct -- the
question has been asked and Dr. Fauci has answered it over, and
over, and over. It's petty, we're all sick of it, and it's
wasting everyone's time.

The president's mortal sin was highlighting a possible treatment.
We also announced, Jan. 20th, that NIH was already working
on a Coronavirus vaccine. And, the first U.S. patient was treated
with an anti-viral, remdesivir, expedited trials of which are
on-going.

Rather than deliver useful information to the American public all
the press can do is try to play a childish, vicious game of 'gotcha,'
rather than jump on board and try to suggest, discover, root out,
and otherwise look for other possibly life-saving treatments.

Proving the Orange Man is Bad is more important to them than doing
their actual job (informing the public), or, heaven forfend, helping.

That's the disgraceful thing.

They're petty, mean-spirited, small-minded, nasty little
virtue-signalers, not particularly bright.

Cheers,
James Arthur

DT said "stop being a bunch of helpless sissies" and a lot of people
don't want to.



--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 18:49:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 18:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 17:27:53 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 16:42, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.


He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

Not trying all feasible anti-virals ASAP is disgraceful

So when are you going to emulate the two possibilities
advocated by other countries leaders, e.g...

Some leaders from Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu
nationalist party have advocated cow urine or cow dung
for its "medicinal" properties.
https://www.dw.com/en/hindu-group-hosts-cow-urine-drinking-party-to-ward-off-coronavirus/a-52773262

Or the Indian prime minister from the 70s:
https://www.freepressjournal.in/cmcm/morarji-desai-the-former-indian-prime-minister-who-practiced-urine-therapy

You are being obnoxious on purpose. Dumb too.

If anything is a potential anti-viral, and is known to be reasonably
safe, it should be tried on sick people immediately, enough to have
some statistical value. At a small risk of harming a small number of
people, we have a decent chance of saving thousands (or billions?)

What good would a couple years of careful clinical trials and peer
review do?

A very smart person said we have nothing to lose.

We used to do that sort of math, trade some risk for a big payoff, in
the past. Lately people are afraid to take any risk, which is itself a
huge risk. Get some sick people to volunteer. Let prisoners elect to
volunteer to test a drug in exchange for pardons.

Let grownups decide to take chances. Save some lives.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Tom Gardner]

On 06/04/20 19:54, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:22:19 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com
wrote:

On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 12:27:58 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 06/04/20 16:42, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.


He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

It's not disgraceful, the president was absolutely correct -- the
question has been asked and Dr. Fauci has answered it over, and
over, and over. It's petty, we're all sick of it, and it's
wasting everyone's time.

The president's mortal sin was highlighting a possible treatment.
We also announced, Jan. 20th, that NIH was already working
on a Coronavirus vaccine. And, the first U.S. patient was treated
with an anti-viral, remdesivir, expedited trials of which are
on-going.

Rather than deliver useful information to the American public all
the press can do is try to play a childish, vicious game of 'gotcha,'
rather than jump on board and try to suggest, discover, root out,
and otherwise look for other possibly life-saving treatments.

Proving the Orange Man is Bad is more important to them than doing
their actual job (informing the public), or, heaven forfend, helping.

That's the disgraceful thing.

They're petty, mean-spirited, small-minded, nasty little
virtue-signalers, not particularly bright.

Cheers,
James Arthur


DT said "stop being a bunch of helpless sissies" and a lot of people
don't want to.

Boris Johnson took the same attitude, and look where he is now.

 

[Ricky C]

On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 5:58:07 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yeah, people are on the verge of revolution in the streets... er, in their homes. Yes, the aren't marching on anything...

I actually mentioned this a while back, that if things get really bad to the point where we would normally have protests... there won't be any protests of more than 10 people and everyone will need to be 6 feet apart. Not much of a protest. At least they can wear the masks without being accused of hiding their faces!

There are also other drugs out there to be tested. I don't know why Trump is so focused on this one drug.

--

Rick C.

+ Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
+ Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[Ricky C]

On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 1:22:26 PM UTC-4, dagmarg...@yahoo.com wrote:

On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 12:27:58 PM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:

He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

It's not disgraceful, the president was absolutely correct -- the
question has been asked and Dr. Fauci has answered it over, and
over, and over. It's petty, we're all sick of it, and it's
wasting everyone's time.

Who's time is it wasting? Trump already made his comments which he has said many, many times and they wanted to hear from Dr Fauci because they knew he would give an opposing viewpoint... a more informed viewpoint. That is the entire point. The EXPERTS say one thing and TRUMP says something different. The EXPERTS say these drugs can be tried, but don't pin any hopes on them. TRUMP says '“there are some very strong, powerful signs” of its potential, although health experts say that the data is extremely limited and that more study of the drug’s effectiveness against the coronavirus is needed.' TRUMP repeatedly says the opposite of what the EXPERTS say and his supporters only hear what they want to hear. TRUMP essentially lies and his supporters can't pick up on it. Larkin is exactly one of those people. He has drunk the Kool-Aid and says it tastes great!


> The president's mortal sin was highlighting a possible treatment.

His failure is hyping the potential of the drug and focusing on that drug above others. Oh yeah, his failure is stepping outside his area of expertise and contradicting the EXPERTS!

We also announced, Jan. 20th, that NIH was already working
on a Coronavirus vaccine. And, the first U.S. patient was treated
with an anti-viral, remdesivir, expedited trials of which are
on-going.

Great!

Rather than deliver useful information to the American public all
the press can do is try to play a childish, vicious game of 'gotcha,'
rather than jump on board and try to suggest, discover, root out,
and otherwise look for other possibly life-saving treatments.

What you call a game of 'gotcha' is the press trying to highlight to the general population how contradictory Trump is and how poor his advice is. That is a patriotic, public service. I don't give a damn how it makes anyone look.

Proving the Orange Man is Bad is more important to them than doing
their actual job (informing the public), or, heaven forfend, helping.

Actually, showing the missteps of a bumbling leader is the biggest and most important role a free press can do. That is exactly the sort of information I want.

That's the disgraceful thing.

They're petty, mean-spirited, small-minded, nasty little
virtue-signalers, not particularly bright.

Yes, "nasty". I guess that's a buzzword with Trump, Larkin and now you. Sounds like you get "nasty" from one another.

--

Rick C.

-- Get 1,000 miles of free Supercharging
-- Tesla referral code - https://ts.la/richard11209

 

[David Brown]

On 06/04/2020 21:04, John Larkin wrote:

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 18:49:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 18:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 17:27:53 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 16:42, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.


He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

Not trying all feasible anti-virals ASAP is disgraceful

So when are you going to emulate the two possibilities
advocated by other countries leaders, e.g...

Some leaders from Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu
nationalist party have advocated cow urine or cow dung
for its "medicinal" properties.
https://www.dw.com/en/hindu-group-hosts-cow-urine-drinking-party-to-ward-off-coronavirus/a-52773262

Or the Indian prime minister from the 70s:
https://www.freepressjournal.in/cmcm/morarji-desai-the-former-indian-prime-minister-who-practiced-urine-therapy


You are being obnoxious on purpose. Dumb too.

If anything is a potential anti-viral, and is known to be reasonably
safe, it should be tried on sick people immediately, enough to have
some statistical value. At a small risk of harming a small number of
people, we have a decent chance of saving thousands (or billions?)

No.

First, the drug is known /not/ to be safe. It has a lot of
side-effects, and in particular is not recommended for people with
diabetes and heart conditions - exactly the kind of people with the
biggest risk of being in danger from Covid-19 in the first place.

So there is a definite risk that it will make at least some people
worse, not better.

What good would a couple years of careful clinical trials and peer
review do?

You don't need a couple of years - it is possible to rush things a bit.
Since this drug is well-known, its dosage, toxicity, side-effects, etc.,
are established.

But if you don't do controlled testing you lose all chance of getting
something better, and you lose all information about the patients and
the disease. If someone gets better, you don't know if it was because
of this drug, or something else about the patient or his/her treatment.
If someone gets worse, you don't know if it was the drug that did it, or
if it is a new strain of the virus, or anything else.


By throwing this drug at everyone, you might save a few hundred lives -
you might kill a few hundred more than would have died otherwise. But
you definitely lose the chance of knowledge that might be saving tens or
hundreds of thousands of lives later on.

It is a typical Trump solution - something that looks like it will make
him popular in the short term with a total and utter disregard for the
long term.

A very smart person said we have nothing to lose.

I don't know of any smart person saying that (unless it is qualified by
"we have nothing to lose by starting controlled tests"). I do know a
total moron who said it in contradiction to all his expert advisors.

We used to do that sort of math, trade some risk for a big payoff, in
the past.

Yes, we did. It's the logic behind blood-letting as a medical treatment
for 2000 years - "It might work, it appears to have helped some people -
some people survived after the treatment. We have nothing else to try,
so let's go for it."

Lately people are afraid to take any risk, which is itself a
huge risk. Get some sick people to volunteer. Let prisoners elect to
volunteer to test a drug in exchange for pardons.

Let grownups decide to take chances. Save some lives.

No, let the /doctors/ - the /experts/ - decide what makes sense. Then
you can actually save some lives, instead of putting the decisions in
the hands of desperate people with no understanding and even less
consideration for the bigger picture.

 

[John Larkin]

On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 20:18:10 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 20:04, John Larkin wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 18:49:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 18:23, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 17:27:53 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 16:42, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Mon, 6 Apr 2020 10:58:02 +0100, Tom Gardner
spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yesterday's New York Times mocked T for sating that Hydroxychloroquine
"will be a game changer." I recall that he said it might be a game
changer.


He's done a lot more than that. Don't trust me, listen
to the man himself (if you can disentangle his barely
coherent ramblings):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTXpRNIDpy0

And at the end his medical advisor (Dr Fauci) is at the
podium and is asked a medical question about
hydroxychloroquine. Trump butts in and stops him answering.

Disgraceful.

Not trying all feasible anti-virals ASAP is disgraceful

So when are you going to emulate the two possibilities
advocated by other countries leaders, e.g...

Some leaders from Prime Minister Narendra Modi's Hindu
nationalist party have advocated cow urine or cow dung
for its "medicinal" properties.
https://www.dw.com/en/hindu-group-hosts-cow-urine-drinking-party-to-ward-off-coronavirus/a-52773262

Or the Indian prime minister from the 70s:
https://www.freepressjournal.in/cmcm/morarji-desai-the-former-indian-prime-minister-who-practiced-urine-therapy


You are being obnoxious on purpose. Dumb too.

Obnoxious isn't the right word. Confrontational, to illustrate
where that chain of thought can lead - yes, guilty.


If anything is a potential anti-viral, and is known to be reasonably
safe, it should be tried on sick people immediately, enough to have
some statistical value. At a small risk of harming a small number of
people, we have a decent chance of saving thousands (or billions?)

What good would a couple years of careful clinical trials and peer
review do?

A very smart person said we have nothing to lose.

Who was that?

How would you react if, when you were grossly overloaded
creating a product, a politician told you to include parts
that you've previously rejected as being a poor fit?

I wouldn't give them a polite answer.

Some medical types will be hyper-cautious, and some will try to see if
things work. The feds should let multiple people experiment with
volunteers. Now.

We used to do that sort of math, trade some risk for a big payoff, in
the past. Lately people are afraid to take any risk, which is itself a
huge risk. Get some sick people to volunteer. Let prisoners elect to
volunteer to test a drug in exchange for pardons.

Let grownups decide to take chances. Save some lives.

If everybody goes off and does random uncontrolled things,
then it will be more difficult to sort the wheat from
the chaff.

Note that does not imply that initial trials take years.
It does imply some loose recording and control.

Certainly clinical experiments should be controlled and documented and
statistically useful. But using all due caution could differentially
kill a lot of people.

The mainstream press is reflexively opposed to hydroxychloroquine
because T suggested it might work. That's the way they "think."

I've volunteered for medical experiments. Might help people.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[Sjouke Burry]

On 06.04.20 21:49, Ricky C wrote:

On Monday, April 6, 2020 at 5:58:07 AM UTC-4, Tom Gardner wrote:
On 06/04/20 09:38, Ricky C wrote:
Seems Peter Navarro has it in for Dr. Fauci and the idea that we might want
to tread carefully before recommending experimental treatments for this
virus. In the situation room, Navarro, the trade advisor, was singing high
praise of the drug hydroxychloroquine and being rather belligerent about
pushing the drug for use on patients with COVID-19. Dr. Fauci, the director
of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, tried to
explain that this drug has been studied for many years for use with
respiratory diseases with no results. It looks good in the lab, but not in
the real world.

Navarro, who has a reputation for outbursts, did not disappoint and accused
Dr. Fauci of "opposing Trump's travel restrictions on China" which is not
only untrue (he supported Trump almost alone) but irrelevant! He got his way
as Trump soon after talked to the press and once again recommended the use of
the drug in spite of the dangerous side effects. Why is the trade advisor
trying to get in the middle of a medical issue?

Oh well. Another day, another ineffective Presidential move in the COVID-19
diaries.

I hope the drug pans out, but there is not much expectation.

One thing I read was that some have tried to get Trump to allow his advisors
to speak, but he wants to do all the talking. Trump has said the briefings
give him free airtime and good ratings. So that's what these presentations
are about for Trump, rather than a time to share information from his expert
advisors, air time on TV for promoting his reelection. CREEP

Hydroxychloroquine might have the same benefits as the
Patriot missiles did in the Gulf war.

The Patriots were ineffective as stopping scuds, but
"we're doing something was being done, so stay onside".
As in "Something must be done. This is something.
This must be done".

In other words, to give people hope, and hence a reason
to stay inside and not go marauding or rioting.

Yeah, people are on the verge of revolution in the streets... er, in their homes. Yes, the aren't marching on anything...

I actually mentioned this a while back, that if things get really bad to the point where we would normally have protests... there won't be any protests of more than 10 people and everyone will need to be 6 feet apart. Not much of a protest. At least they can wear the masks without being accused of hiding their faces!

There are also other drugs out there to be tested. I don't know why Trump is so focused on this one drug.

Because he succeeded in using such a yaw braking word in a sentence ?

 

[John Larkin]

On 6 Apr 2020 12:39:10 -0700, Winfield Hill <winfieldhill@yahoo.com>
wrote:

John Larkin wrote...

If anything is a potential anti-viral, and is known to
be reasonably safe, it should be tried on sick people
immediately, enough to have some statistical value.

John, believe me, it has been, and it is. Thousands
of individual doctors have and are adding it to their
treatments. As Fauci said, they're free to use it
"off label". I read details of someone just admitted
to MGH (the premier teaching hospital in Boston, if
not the U.S.), and the treatment description included
hydroxychloroquine. Problem is, it's well known that
it doesn't work very well, if at all. That's what the
doctors who are using it say. And multiple studies as
well. But it certainly is being tried again and again
anyway. What we need to concentrate on, is a decent
therapeutic, that actually WORKS, and works well.

We need to find them first. Try things. In parallel.

This sounds sensible:

https://nypost.com/2020/04/05/ny-coronavirus-patients-being-treated-with-anti-malarial-drug/

Ultimately we need vaccines and antibodies, but they would take time
to get into production once they work.

I think that some day in the future, within 50 years maybe, we will be
able to sequence a virus and make volumes of vaccines and antibodies
quickly. We should spend a lot of money on developing that, before
another 1918-scale critter comes along.

Somebody said that the 20th century was the century of physics, and
the 21st will be the century of biology. Don't waste tens of billions
to put a few more bootprints in moon dust.

--

John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
picosecond timing precision measurement

jlarkin att highlandtechnology dott com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

 

[David Brown]

On 06/04/2020 22:09, John Larkin wrote:

Some medical types will be hyper-cautious, and some will try to see if
things work. The feds should let multiple people experiment with
volunteers. Now.

You really are clueless, aren't you? You think Trump is your anointed
saviour who can brush aside the evils of rules and regulation with a
sweep of his tiny little godlike hands.

Doctors and medical researchers could already use drugs like
hydroxychloroquine in proper, controlled trials. They are already doing
so in other countries - /real/ trials.

What they can't do - and don't want to do, and are not allowed to do
regardless of any trumpeting - is prescribe a drug as a cure for a
disease when no one has any idea if it works or not.