• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine for Thousands in New York

Gladiator said:
So is it possible that Hydroxychloroquine does not lower the death rate, but does shorten the time in ICU for those Covid-19 patients who will survive, then perhaps the demand for ventilators ICU beds will reduce. Isn't that one of the goals for Covid-19 to be less of a burden on the health sector of the country/world?


//
Click to expand...

Shortens time in the ICU! In a small selection of patients in China. Maybe.

That’s a long long way from established utility.
 
Robertinfremont said:
Did we elect Trump to be a doctor or a president? As president he has a duty to cheerlead during times of trouble. The Democrats can't tolerate Trump cheerleading. And you make my point when you post. Trump haters showed up the day he was installed as president. By the millions. And over what? All he had done then was be installed as president.
Click to expand...

Checkerboard Strangler said:
Your block of word salad fails to refute a single thing I said, plus you added some Gish Galloping to confuse low-information readers? Wow, extra points for you in the fail pail!

:failpail:

They want to know what doctors are doing? Dr. Anthony Fauci has been telling everyone exactly what doctors are doing because he actually IS a doctor, which brings me BACK to my point: If Fauci or some other similarly qualified medical expert says Trump's favorite unproven drug is a good idea, THEN it might be considered possible positive news.
And even then, Trump does not deserve the credit, the MEDICAL COMMUNITY does, the SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY does.

Trump wants the credit even though he has done nothing to earn the credit.
Trump wants the credit because TrumpCo leveraged themselves in Novartis, which makes the drug.



Next, New York's biggest problem is the classic pandemic problem:

1. Density of population
2. Density of population

One of the reasons the L.A. metro area is apparently recovering a little bit faster despite higher population numbers is because Los Angeles is really a patchwork of hundreds of smaller communities knit together by a vast network of freeways, not a tightly packed urban sprawl with a downtown.
Sure, we DO HAVE a downtown but if you ask Angelenos, 85% of them have never been downtown or only visit downtown on rare occasions.

So us being all spread out and naturally insulated by our automobile dependence instead of subways, buses and taxis like NYC is one reason we are recovering faster. People find...

That is EXACTLY what Trump has been doing.
In fact, he even had a mini-meltdown the first time Jim Acosta questioned his wisdom on hydroxychloroquine...

You are just another Trump cult follower, and anyone who disagrees with your cult leader is an enemy.
You have zero facts because cult followers aren't allowed to think.
If you HAD facts, you would have presented them instead of whining.

View attachment 67277381
Click to expand...
Your rhetoric is simply a projection of your hatred and political bias intended to further inflame a crisis Americans are facing which is a result of an bio attack. Projecting your hysterics and whining is not productive and only reveals your pettiness and anti American views.

While you may feed from the propaganda mash in the trough, free thinking Americans will not. They will not be bullied into consuming the poison intended to trap the sheeple who will march lockstep into the arms of a commy socialist regime.

The dem leaders were encouraging their citizens to party on until they realized NYC better isolate themselves. Cuomo cried to Trump because he didn’t prepare and then complained he couldn’t steal enough of the national resources for himself.

Acosta is a shill and talk about low IQ....no one with a brain the size of a peanut shell thinks he is a journalist.

I’m sure it’s hard to deal with the fact Cali folks are starting to leave the tax laden failure ...even Hollywood is looking for greener pastures. You are hardly in a position to call out anyone....I’m actually embarrassed for you as I read this post. Learn to think for yourself and grow up because I still see the pablum on your bib.
Btw: I haven’t even considered giving Trump credit for treatments and meds...why would you? He’s too busy getting the slow moving govt into action as well as private industry. It’s amazing he’s moved things as fast as he has....even in spite of all the haters trying to make him fail. Revolting. You should be ashamed. It’s a national crisis and you want to complain about Trump discussing what’s going on on the battlefront. Good grief.
 
Freeamerican said:
Your rhetoric is simply a projection of your hatred and political bias intended to further inflame a crisis Americans are facing which is a result of an bio attack. Projecting your hysterics and whining is not productive and only reveals your pettiness and anti American views.

While you may feed from the propaganda mash in the trough, free thinking Americans will not. They will not be bullied into consuming the poison intended to trap the sheeple who will march lockstep into the arms of a commy socialist regime.

The dem leaders were encouraging their citizens to party on until they realized NYC better isolate themselves. Cuomo cried to Trump because he didn’t prepare and then complained he couldn’t steal enough of the national resources for himself.

Acosta is a shill and talk about low IQ....no one with a brain the size of a peanut shell thinks he is a journalist.

I’m sure it’s hard to deal with the fact Cali folks are starting to leave the tax laden failure ...even Hollywood is looking for greener pastures. You are hardly in a position to call out anyone....I’m actually embarrassed for you as I read this post. Learn to think for yourself and grow up because I still see the pablum on your bib.
Btw: I haven’t even considered giving Trump credit for treatments and meds...why would you? He’s too busy getting the slow moving govt into action as well as private industry. It’s amazing he’s moved things as fast as he has....even in spite of all the haters trying to make him fail. Revolting. You should be ashamed. It’s a national crisis and you want to complain about Trump discussing what’s going on on the battlefront. Good grief.
Click to expand...

Still can't refute a single thing I said.
Party on, Jim Jones lover.
 
Jack Hays said:
Well, it worked for the Third Reich for a while . . .
Is that your model?
Click to expand...

Key phrase "for a while". It ended with Hitler's death, didn't it? That certainly got rid of most of the hate.
 
Robertinfremont said:
How did you feel about the alleged massive hate directed at Obama? Per your standards I expect you to shout out, hey it was so cool.
Click to expand...

Except that much of the hate was not tailored toward the person Obama was but for the color of the skin. That was not something that Obama could do anything about.
 
Robertinfremont said:
Don't you understand Trumps caveats?

His entire thesis is based on the drug he speaks of is already a drug proven to prevent Malaria. He says it might or might not work. And you did not hear him say that?
Click to expand...

I did not know we were suffering from Malaria, are we?
 
Threegoofs said:
Shortens time in the ICU! In a small selection of patients in China. Maybe.

That’s a long long way from established utility.
Click to expand...

Right? Why is Trump and Cuomo allowed to poison NY residents based on data from China? (or maybe nowhere.)
 
Jack Hays said:
Hmmm. I thought hate was what you were advocating.
Click to expand...

Advocating? I don't advocate anything for others. Each person is an adult and they can think and feel for themselves. What I am doing is called "communication" and advancement of knowledge about how others think and feel and why. Understanding how other people think and feel expands your knowledge of humanity. We all know how we personally feel but most of us are blind to how the same actions affects other people.

The only thing that I do advocate is for everyone to make a knowledgeable decision where it affects others.
 
[h=3]Therapeutic Options for COVID-19 Patients | CDC[/h]www.cdc.gov › coronavirus › 2019-ncov › hcp › therapeutic-options
4p5g15zgcFvQlZKS1WrxlhlHy1c11ti8jyE0d3g4yRbjXlqn alkoeDWJYK4woHvQ07DhyZJbqCGe69VfCQS9BgRkToyMOfU3YGJU3956S8I7JIIiYx yEkM1 whahw4LxQGYgdYl4plFz6HDbq78zUVsVLH030lyNr8L8vuXgLCqAdo9IAAAAASUVORK5CYII=






50 mins ago - Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are under investigation in clinical trials for pre-exposure or post-exposure prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 ...
 
Threegoofs said:
Shortens time in the ICU! In a small selection of patients in China. Maybe.

That’s a long long way from established utility.
Click to expand...

Yeah? So what?

Why are you such a Debbie downer about everything?
 
longview said:
Well the results of the WHO study and the New York study, should be out soon.
before those are out, empirical results may show itself, in lots of people getting better.
Click to expand...

Lots of people ARE getting better, since the virus only kills about 1% of the people. The problem is, what do we attribute this "lots of people"'s improvement to, the natural course of the illness that typically doesn't kill people who are not too old and do not have a lot of underlying conditions, or the effect of the drug?

Because it's very hard to go by impressions and opinions when the kill rate of an infection is only 1%. You don't know if the 99% of people who got better would have gotten better even without the medication. That's precisely what PLACEBO controlled trials are for, and they need to be paired for similar patients. See, if you get to compare the anecdotal case of someone who takes the medication for a medium severity case and gets better, to someone who has severe disease, doesn't take the medication, and dies, you can't compare apples and oranges. Maybe the moderate case would have improved without the medication anyway, and maybe the severe case would have died even if had been given the medication. See what I mean? You have to pair 1:1 similar cases (in degree of severity, viral load, number of underlying conditions, age, fitness, etc.) and randomly send one to the active group, and one to the placebo group. Get hundreds of these cases, randomize them this way, do your treatments (double blind) and THEN compare the results. Otherwise you're just dealing with opinion, hope, and hype.

The bottom line is, anecdotes and impressions count for nothing, in science, even from doctors. There are plenty of doctors treating patients in clinical trials who swear that their patients are improving and it must be the study's active medication; they swear that the medication must be working... only to be surprised, when the envelopes are open at the end of the study, to realize that their patients were taking placebo. So much for those impressions and those opinions...

There is a reason for Dr. Fauci to say OVER AND OVER AND OVER that there is no evidence yet supporting the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19. That's because there isn't, actually.
 
Last edited:
Fletch said:
Projection. I support doctors prescribing it as a treatment because it is showing signs of working. Trump has nothing to do with it.
Click to expand...

Ah huh, sure. You don't do anything without Trump's permission. :mrgreen:
 
Last edited:
From the article linked to on post #322

Jeremy Faust, an emergency physician at Harvard Medical School and Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, has attempted to caution against the idea of hydroxychloroquine as a preventive medication: “Patients with lupus, arthritis, other conditions are *already* on hydroxychloroquine. And we are diagnosing them with Covid-19 LEFT AND RIGHT.”
Click to expand...

Why is it that the really highly educated doctors, like this one from Harvard Medical School, our freaking best school of medicine, keep warning people against this, while "Dr." Donald J. Trump who last I checked never attended medical school, keeps touting it? One gets suspicious, when one realizes that the Trump Corporation has purchased a huge chunk of Novartis, the pharma company that makes hydroxychloroquine.

Before you called me partisan (I am a member of no party, by the way) in my first posts about COVID-19 I was defending Trump when people attacked him for taking his time to start preventative measures. I kept saying "it's not his fault, all governments all over the world have been powerless to stop this; the virus is just too contagious; we might have gained a few weeks if he had acted faster, but then, the virus would still run its course, just, with a few weeks of delay, but would end up hitting approximately the same number of people." But yes, I turned against him when he started spouting medical advice, while being unqualified to do so.
 
bubbabgone said:
You're too personally biased to be of any practical use to patients.
Click to expand...

What the hell are you talking about? Real science knows no personal bias. It's exactly what science *is*: un objective look at nature, under controlled circumstances to weed out intervening factors, so that THERE IS NO BIAS!!!

Bias exists in opinions. Bias does not exist in a properly designed study that deals in scientific facts. If there is bias in a study, then it's a problem with the design, the methodology, the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the instruments, etc., being the most common bias the one expressed in intentionally twisted statistical treatment of the data. Often when this is the case, it's because the sponsor of the study has a commercial interest in it (like the "studies" sponsored by drug makers that miraculously show their drugs as so much better than a competitor's drugs, while studies sponsored by the competitor show the exact opposite). A trained scientist can read a study and spot its flaws, if they exist. That's exactly why there is such thing as a peer-reviewed scientific journal - so that we don't publish the biased ones. I am, by the way, a member of the peer-reviewing corps of a number of scientific journals, as well as a member of the editorial board of some others.

I never said that it is proven that this DOES NOT work. Maybe it does work. I certainly hope it does. What I said is that it hasn't been proven, YET, that this works. As a matter of fact, neither possibility has been proven. I hasn't been proven that it doesn't work, and it hasn't been proven that it does work. We should know more shortly, in May when the first proper studies start getting completed and findings are diffused.

You misunderstand the goals of my posting. I am for rigorous scientific standards. I am not for lay people like president Trump dispensing dangerous medical advice. If the president hadn't done that, I wouldn't be criticizing him here, at least not on this (yes, I dislike the guy, but I was actually defending him on the coronavirus situation, until he started his crusade for HCQ use).

Now, the idea that I'm not useful to patients is frontally contradicted by the position I occupy in my organization, and the HUGE salary I'm paid. Those who aren't useful to patients don't get to where I am. My organization knows the value I have for us and for our patients, which is why I'm lavishly compensated: so that I'm not poached by other organizations (which they have tried to do, many times; by the way this is how I got to my current one; I was in a different one before, and was poached by my current one with an offer that couldn't be matched - good luck getting offered that, if you are useless).
 
Last edited:
GreatNews2night said:
From the article linked to on post #322



Why is it that the really highly educated doctors, like this one from Harvard Medical School, our freaking best school of medicine, keep warning people against this, while "Dr." Donald J. Trump who last I checked never attended medical school, keeps touting it? One gets suspicious, when one realizes that the Trump Corporation has purchased a huge chunk of Novartis, the pharma company that makes hydroxychloroquine.

Before you called me partisan (I am a member of no party, by the way) in my first posts about COVID-19 I was defending Trump when people attacked him for taking his time to start preventative measures. I kept saying "it's not his fault, all governments all over the world have been powerless to stop this; the virus is just too contagious; we might have gained a few weeks if he had acted faster, but then, the virus would still run its course, just, with a few weeks of delay, but would end up hitting approximately the same number of people." But yes, I turned against him when he started spouting medical advice, while being unqualified to do so.
Click to expand...

If Trump thinks he can make money by investing in Novartis and pumping a low margin commodity drug from its generic house, Sandoz, then he’s stupider than I even think.
 
jmotivator said:
It's the core of any appeal to authority... his definition of authority is "they agree with me!", which is just the round about way for the Threegoofs of the world to express their belief that they are actually the authority.
Click to expand...

And that's the trouble with the entire HCQ issue.
Some people simply don't bother to look at pros and cons and you can tell by their reaction to what they're shown.
And others think they know all there is to know without looking.
Oh well.
 
Threegoofs said:
If Trump thinks he can make money by investing in Novartis and pumping a low margin commodity drug from its generic house, Sandoz, then he’s stupider than I even think.
Click to expand...

Maybe the money trail is not showing so easily, on the surface. It's been shown here that Novartis was one of the main lobbyists and contributors to Trump, at the time of the Michael Cohen debacle. So we don't know what the deeper ties are. And we don't know what might be in the works for a new patent of a derivative.

Example: what is the very expensive drug Invega? Paliperidone. Now, what is paliperidone? It's a step ahead in the metabolism of risperidone.

Look at this. Here is the full chemical name/structure of paliperidone.

3-[2-[4-(6-fluoro-1,2-benzisoxazol-3-yl)-1-piperidinyl]ethyl]-6,7,8,9-tetrahydro-2-methyl-4H-pyrido[1,2-a] pyrimidin-4-one.

Its molecular formula is C23H27FN4O2.

Now let's see what risperidone is.

(±)-3-[2-[4-(6-fluoro-1,2-‑benzisoxazol-3-yl)-1-piperidinyl]ethyl]-6,7,8,9-tetrahydro-9-hydroxy-2-methyl-4H-‑pyrido[1,2-a]pyrimidin-4-one.

Its molecular formula is C23H27FN4O3.

What is common here?

Almost EVERYTHING!!! It's the 9-hydroxy form of the other one. It's an active metabolite of risperidone. Paliperidone is nothing other than 9-hydroxyrisperidone. Risperidone breaks into paliperidone in the body.

So, risperidone (brand name Risperdal) had its patent expired... became generic and became cheap. So what did Janssen do (the original makers of Risperidal)? They made paliperidone! Got a new patent.

Do you know how much a shot of Invega Sustenna costs, without insurance?

$2,521.99

No kidding.

So, don't count big pharma out, in terms of new uses, new FDA indications, and new (slightly modified) drugs for new patents, then becoming hugely profitable.
 
GreatNews2night said:
What the hell are you talking about? Real science knows no personal bias. It's exactly what science *is*: un objective look at nature, under controlled circumstances to weed out intervening factors, so that THERE IS NO BIAS!!!

Bias exists in opinions. Bias does not exist in a properly designed study that deals in scientific facts. If there is bias in a study, then it's a problem with the design, the methodology, the inclusion and exclusion criteria, the instruments, etc., being the most common bias the one expressed in intentionally twisted statistical treatment of the data. Often when this is the case, it's because the sponsor of the study has a commercial interest in it (like the "studies" sponsored by drug makers that miraculously show their drugs as so much better than a competitor's drugs, while studies sponsored by the competitor show the exact opposite). A trained scientist can read a study and spot its flaws, if they exist. That's exactly why there is such thing as a peer-reviewed scientific journal - so that we don't publish the biased ones. I am, by the way, a member of the peer-reviewing corps of a number of scientific journals, as well as a member of the editorial board of some others.

I never said that it is proven that this DOES NOT work. Maybe it does work. I certainly hope it does. What I said is that it hasn't been proven, YET, that this works. As a matter of fact, neither possibility has been proven. I hasn't been proven that it doesn't work, and it hasn't been proven that it does work. We should know more shortly, in May when the first proper studies start getting completed and findings are diffused.

You misunderstand the goals of my posting. I am for rigorous scientific standards. I am not for lay people like president Trump dispensing dangerous medical advice. If the president hadn't done that, I wouldn't be criticizing him here, at least not on this (yes, I dislike the guy, but I was actually defending him on the coronavirus situation, until he started his crusade for HCQ use).

Now, the idea that I'm not useful to patients is frontally contradicted by the position I occupy in my organization, and the HUGE salary I'm paid. Those who aren't useful to patients don't get to where I am. My organization knows the value I have for us and for our patients, which is why I'm lavishly compensated: so that I'm not poached by other organizations (which they have tried to do, many times; by the way this is how I got to my current one; I was in a different one before, and was poached by my current one with an offer that couldn't be matched - good luck getting offered that, if you are useless).
Click to expand...

You have a personal bias that affects your opinion.
I happen to agree with a lot of what you say.
I also see you're not inclined to entertain the notion that you might not know everything because you assign either ignorance or questionable motives to front-line physicians when they report their experiences.
Perhaps if you didn't write the things you wrote in your last paragraph you'd win more converts to your position.
But I don't expect that's going to change.
 
bubbabgone said:
And that's the trouble with the entire HCQ issue.
Some people simply don't bother to look at pros and cons and you can tell by their reaction to what they're shown.
And others think they know all there is to know without looking.
Oh well.
Click to expand...

And still others who are actually scientists who know what they are talking about. You forgot to mention that category.
 
GreatNews2night said:
Lots of people ARE getting better, since the virus only kills about 1% of the people. The problem is, what do we attribute this "lots of people"'s improvement to, the natural course of the illness that typically doesn't kill people who are not too old and do not have a lot of underlying conditions, or the effect of the drug?
Click to expand...

^^^^^
 
Threegoofs said:
If Trump thinks he can make money by investing in Novartis and pumping a low margin commodity drug from its generic house, Sandoz, then he’s stupider than I even think.
Click to expand...

You missed the news about insulin prices, I guess.
 
Trump is pimping HCQ for the money. He's also pushing hard to take credit for the work of scientists and other medical professionals so that he can claim to be the savior of the world. If HCQ doesn't provide the results he hopes for, he will blame others. He thinks he knows more than the doctors. He thinks he's the smartest guy on Earth, he thinks he knows more than anyone, about anything.

I'm wondering what's next.
Maybe Trump will wake up at 3:00 AM this morning and decide that he knows more than the physicists and demand that nuclear power plant operators take directions from him, and the word from the DoE will go out, warning career professionals not to contradict Trump's orders or speak out against them.

And in the ensuing fire and ash of a nuclear accident worse than Chernobyl, we'll hear Trump speaking from Air Force One (on the way to Moscow) blaming it all on the Obama administration, and demanding that his followers avenge him so that he can return safely to the Presidential CoG bunker and become President for Life....because "the Democrats did this to us".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom