Objectively intelligent.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

You need the ventilators at some point because the virus does so much damage to your lungs. The ventilators are not treating the virus, they are trying to help the patient survive the damage the virus does to your lungs. You need to be careful with ventilators generally, because people who go on them are very, very sick, to the point that they can't get enough oxygen breathing for themselves, and all sorts of things can go wrong, both because they have other problems and because people are not designed to breathe through tubes stuck down their throats.

https://www.businessinsider.com/coro...th-rate-2020-4

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

That’s a nice strawman.

What is the strawman? Most people who get the virus don't get hospitalized. Most people who get hospitalized don't die. If you take that medication, you are still unlike to get hospitalized or, if you do, to die. The same is true if you paint your left arm blue. It doesn't mean either made a difference.

Now deal with this:

1. There is no huge data set. All we have is anecdata. These are the cards. Play the hand. Don’t argue about how great it’d be if we had a better hand. No shit it’d be better.

There actually are data sets. There are people who are looking at this rigorously. The New York Post is not interested in publicizing that research because it is not uplifting, does not suggest that there is a miracle cure, and will not sell newspapers.

2. Icky and I have both known people who have had excellent results on this drug. I’ve spoken to docs who have seen it cause people on oxygen to come off oxygen. I’ve also had docs tell me lupus patients on it have bizarrely done well with Covid despite being compromised. Guess what drug they were on.

Your use of the word "cause" in that sentence is telling. Plenty of people who are on oxygen then come off oxygen. But when it happens with someone who has taken your wonder drug, people who should know better attribute cause and effect to the correlation. I'm sure there are some doctors who believe that the drugs caused a better outcome. That doesn't mean that they're right.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Your use of the word "cause" in that sentence is telling. Plenty of people who are on oxygen then come off oxygen. But when it happens with someone who has taken your wonder drug, people who should know better attribute cause and effect to the correlation. I'm sure there are some doctors who believe that the drugs caused a better outcome. That doesn't mean that they're right.

So you KNOW it doesn't help? Or are you saying maybe it helps, maybe not? Cuz it sounds like you KNOW it doesn't.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

https://www.businessinsider.com/coro...th-rate-2020-4

You'll also be interested in these:

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog...acute-covid-19

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog...cal-covid-19-2

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

So you KNOW it doesn't help? Or are you saying maybe it helps, maybe not? Cuz it sounds like you KNOW it doesn't.

There is no way for that doctor to know that the drug caused the recovery. We can't rule out that it might help. That will take much more research. I did just ask Ms. Slothrop, who is just home from another fun day in scrubs actually doing this stuff, whether the malaria drugs do anything. She was just in the loop about that at work, and was categorically dismissive. Could it turn out that a teaching hospital is wrong about that? Sure. Is it possible that the drug has some positive effects in some subset of cases? Sure. Is Sebby hyping things? Yes. Is that because he badly wants there to be a miracle cure? You'd need a brain surgeon to figure that out.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Hey RT, this doesn't sound good.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Net job losses during the Great Recession: 8.7 million

New jobless claims in the last three weeks: 16 million

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Net job losses during the Great Recession: 8.7 million

New jobless claims in the last three weeks: 16 million

Bite me. Some won't, but how many come back the moment shelter-in-place orders are lifted? It is a ridicuous comparision. I wish (because I am short) that it is systemic like the Great Depression, but it is not. So, just stop.

[LessinSF]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Might be time for you and Paigs to finally take that plunge?

One, she would have to find me. Two, that's the point. It will be such a free-for-all that even Paigow might be able to find someone better than me, with or without her cane.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Yes, because what we need right now is more politicians touting untested drugs.

Are you even listening to yourself? The proof is not "weak," it's entirely anecdotal. You dismiss the risk of heart attacks as "real" but "the size of a rounding error." Any "proof" is -- likewise -- no more than a rounding error. And not necessarily real. That's why you want hospitals to figure it out, and not to do medicine on the basis of what you read in the New York Post. Do you really think the doctors in all the hospitals treating all the people dying from this virus aren't interested in "exploring all options"? That if they only read the New York Post then lives would be saved? Get real. My wife is treating Covid-19 patients at a teaching hospital, and I eagerly anticipate the day when she comes home at says this is helping people. Hasn't happened yet.

The strong desire for a miracle cure is completely understandable, and it's great TV, but it is depressing to see so many people succumbing to wishful thinking. It's getting people killed. Imagine if Trump spent all that energy telling people to avoid contact with each other.

Most medicine is anecdotal. Half of JAMA and NEJM are case studies, same with grand rounds and M&M conferences. That said, I've seen the application to this particular combo all over the place. Sometimes as a prophylactic, sometimes administered late, and there's absolutely no consensus on it. If it does "work" it's unclear how or why. AFAIK, we're not using it in our facilities; we're focused on the plasma transfusions down here.

We still haven't been hit hard. As of April 8, 2020 released on April 9, 2020:

ICU Beds: 1,462

21% occupied by COVID-19 patients

47% occupied by non-COVID-19 patients

32% available

Another 1,370 ICU beds can be added during a surge for 2,800+ beds

Ventilators: 2,352

6% occupied by COVID-19 patients

15% occupied by non-COVID-19 patients

79% available

We're decent-ish on social distancing down here, and the PPE problem is more or less under control assuming things stay constant.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Hey RT, this doesn't sound good.

Yeah, I don't know. I know it's definitely here, but it's not overwhelming us. I think that's because we've pretty much kicked out everyone out of the hospitals who we can. I just posted above the stats that came out today on our capacity.

The epidemiologists at work seem to think that our peak will be coming two weeks earlier than predicted, and it might not be as bad as earlier predicted. Our population density may have something to do with it. We shut things down mid-March, and it does seem to be working. We'll see. I suspect this week will tell.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Bite me. Some won't, but how many come back the moment shelter-in-place orders are lifted? It is a ridicuous comparision. I wish (because I am short) that it is systemic like the Great Depression, but it is not. So, just stop.

Apples to oranges, but that's a lot of jobless claims.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Apples to oranges, but that's a lot of jobless claims.

Ummm the whole country was ordered home. How do you not see that leads to a stupid number? Actually nvm. People who run stuff all day understand stuff that people who read blogs all day might not.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

There is no way for that doctor to know that the drug caused the recovery. We can't rule out that it might help. That will take much more research. I did just ask Ms. Slothrop, who is just home from another fun day in scrubs actually doing this stuff, whether the malaria drugs do anything. She was just in the loop about that at work, and was categorically dismissive. Could it turn out that a teaching hospital is wrong about that? Sure. Is it possible that the drug has some positive effects in some subset of cases? Sure. Is Sebby hyping things? Yes. Is that because he badly wants there to be a miracle cure? You'd need a brain surgeon to figure that out.

I’m not hyping. You’re logically illiterate here. Sorry. But you are. And you know it. You’re grasping.

You don’t know, and the quantum of evidence is anecdote, but it’s bigger than what you’ve got, which is just: “We need a study.”

Stand down. Let the experiment run its course. (Which is a whole other argument against why no one in his right mind should not be behind trying every drug here.)

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by LessinSF

Bite me. Some won't, but how many come back the moment shelter-in-place orders are lifted? It is a ridicuous comparision. I wish (because I am short) that it is systemic like the Great Depression, but it is not. So, just stop.

This is not systemic. But it’s like melanoma. Catch it early, 95% cure rate. Let it get past 4 mm depth, 5 year survival goes to 25%.

Ty’s speaking bluntly, but this gets systemic fast. His point is important.

I’m not an economist, but I play one here, and I know loan workouts better than a lot, and this is classic story about bankruptcy. Everything’s slow slow slow and everything’s fine... and then suddenly it isn’t.

This bull market resurgence is a pile of shit even if we find a cure. It’s generated to let the big guys get out and leave the little shmucks holding the bag. I’d wait for this to crater back to 17k and then buy again. Fucking cannibals’ market.