Objectively intelligent.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

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.

He doesn’t know that. He can’t know that. His argument is all anecdotal evidence can be explained as placebo effect or natural disease resolution and we need a study.

It’s silly.

[Replaced_Texan]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

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.)

There is a study. What I find much more interesting is the ongoing research with the BCG vaccine, which may explain why there haven't been the type of outbreaks in places like Africa and Central America as there has been in more developed countries. 100 million babies a year get it all over the world.

Every scientist in the world who has the ability is looking into all of these possible solutions. Pinning hopes on one or another is probably not going to work, but in combination they might buy time to get to the vaccine.

BTW, my favorite part of the BCG wiki is yet another demonstration that the US method of relying on capitalism through monopoly has some very fucked up results.

It is on the World Health Organization's List of Essential Medicines, the safest and most effective medicines needed in a health system.[5] Between 2011 and 2014 the wholesale price was US$0.16 to US$1.11 a dose in the developing world.[6][7] In the United States it costs US$100 to US$200.[8]

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan

There is a study. What I find much more interesting is the ongoing research with the BCG vaccine, which may explain why there haven't been the type of outbreaks in places like Africa and Central America as there has been in more developed countries. 100 million babies a year get it all over the world.

Every scientist in the world who has the ability is looking into all of these possible solutions. Pinning hopes on one or another is probably not going to work, but in combination they might buy time to get to the vaccine.

BTW, my favorite part of the BCG wiki is yet another demonstration that the US method of relying on capitalism through monopoly has some very fucked up results.

Can someone please put that in Trump’s hand before his next presser? It sounds like it has at least as much promise as hydrochloroquine. We should try it ASAP, everywhere.

I’d really like to see convalescent serum become a treatment as it’s a pretty easily and well understood therapy, but I understand it has a long pipeline to mass public dosage.

As to US price, a silver lining in this tragic mess is we’re going to wind up with single payer sooner than later. This is kind of a Waterloo for private insurance.

ETA: The study of 1000 patients from France had flaws in comparison to longer term studies. But how couldn’t it? It’s comparing battlefield triage with ER-on-a-years-worth-of-suburban-ER-visits treatment.

The same logical reason to try this TB drug underpins the argument in favor of the malaria drug.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I've spoken to four different docs who say it does actually work. And these are hardcore Trump haters.

https://nypost.com/2020/04/07/michig...aved-her-life/

If you read the stories saying the proof is weak, you're swallowing a bit of sophistry. The proof is weak when compared to empirical studies done over a longer term. There are no analogues but for frenzied studies done on novel viruses like MERS or SARS. The only apt comparison to the few studies we have would be equally small studies performed on SARS and MERS within the month or two after those diseases emerged. Those studies would be similarly incomplete.

To compare a study done under emergent conditions with a novel virus to studies done over a long period of time is classic apples and oranges.

To a degree, we must rely on "anecdata" in regard to any new treatment offered for Covid-19.

I think some in the media understand that. Some are dumb and don't. The latter are to be ignored, the former loathed.

And all of their arguments are a bit silly. When someone points a gun at your head, you don't get to say, "Wait. I'll need time to run a rigorous assessment of possible reactions to see what my best reply is." You play the best hand you can come up with in the moment.

Logic dictates we throw every drug we have at this thing and explore all options. The malaria drug is showing promise, and its cheap and easy to produce. And please don't sing me a song about how it's killing lupus patients. It's not. That's a facile argument. There's a factory pumping that drug out like mad an hour from my house. The docs I've spoken to about it also say the risk of a heart attack on it, while real, is the size of a rounding error.

I wish Biden had touted the drug. We'd be able to have much more honest conversations about it.

This is not how science works. Anecdotes are not data. The "studies" you're referring to are not studies. They offer at best a hypothesis that needs to be tested.

Logic does not dictate wide-spread use of drugs that haven't been proven safe and effective, especially as there are serious side effects and such off-label use risks depriving people who actually need those drugs from getting them.

What we know if that it should be tested as quickly as we can test it. Anything more is simply wrong. You sound very, very stupid here.

[Adder]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

It works to a significant degree and they know it. They're giving to people here.

The problem is, if you get it too late, it does not work. Once the cytokine storm has gone too far, it appears there's no way back.

BUT, here's how our delightful media engages in sleight of hand: https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...isn-t-n1177556

The article should be titled, "Hydroxychloroquine Found Only Effective if Used Early." That's entirely factual, and if our media cared, rather than wanted to see a fight, and more deaths to increase ratings, they'd write the story that way. Because if people read a story like that, they'd seek the drug early, before they wound up burdening an ICU by having to be put on a ventilator.

But no -- our media isn't going to be honest at all. On the right, Fox will talk about how the drug is miracle cure. It's not. On the left, they'll shade stories however they can to suggest it's not effective. It is.

Politics. Tribalism. We've got a gun pointed at our heads and we're still at it. Amazing.

ETA: I've a family member who practiced cancer medicine, among a few other specialties, for over 50 years. I asked this person about the heart attack risk. Response was, "Minimal. They hand it out like candy in Africa." I have clients who are originally from and regularly travel back to Africa. They verified that statement. I asked about whether a z pak had any adverse side effects. The doc in my family told me that choice of the z pak is not predicated solely on its ability to avoid secondary bacterial pneumonia, but also because for reasons unknown, z pak will uniquely decrease inflammation. See that in the media? Fuck no.

Here's an enormous steaming pile of sophistry: https://www.vox.com/2020/4/7/2120953...clinical-trial That cat should go to law school. A common man reading that article would have no idea how cleverly he'd just been victimized by someone dishonestly re-framing an issue to avoid addressing the important question.

It's good to know that your lack for judgment extends beyond politics.

The media isn't being "tribal." They're doing what they do. Ask the experts and repeat what they say. The skepticism isn't from the media. It from people who actually know what they are talking about.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

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.

I was going to write a longer response to this post but I have to go tell a bunch of people who work for us that they don't have jobs anymore.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Let the experiment run its course.

First sensible thing you've said about this. Listen to yourself.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I was going to write a longer response to this post but I have to go tell a bunch of people who work for us that they don't have jobs anymore.

Wow, what is it like running a company right now? Is it hard?

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

This is not how science works. Anecdotes are not data. The "studies" you're referring to are not studies. They offer at best a hypothesis that needs to be tested.

Logic does not dictate wide-spread use of drugs that haven't been proven safe and effective, especially as there are serious side effects and such off-label use risks depriving people who actually need those drugs from getting them.

What we know if that it should be tested as quickly as we can test it. Anything more is simply wrong. You sound very, very stupid here.

No. As usual, you sound mildly autistic. And lacking any capacity for logical thinking beyond the limited training you've received.

You're an idiot on this point. A fucking idiot.

You've completely ignored the fact that the side effects from this drug impact a tiny sliver of people receiving it (it's handed out like candy in Africa). You also ignored the science of z pak's impact on inflammation. And the last dipshit thing you'll offer is the placebo effect argument.

I know you're a lawyer, and you've never run anything and never received anything but a W-2, and are probably the kind of lawyer who only knows how to tell people, "No you can't." That's very obvious from your history of dull responses. But here's a thing a person who's run a business and had to make decisions without "studies" in hand might understand which you do not: Cost/Benefit Analysis. (No, not abstract risk of litigation you'd assess, sweet little Adder - real risk, where you don't have all the facts.) The cost/benefit here is a no brainer. Keep doling out the malaria drug and z pak and allow the real time experiment to continue. If in a month, the larger data set shows it doesn't work, drop it. If it continues to show promise, examine why in greater detail. And during this time, keep exploring all other options. You don't have a single credible logical rebuttal to that. None.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

First sensible thing you've said about this. Listen to yourself.

Exactly. That's all I've been saying. We're doling out the drug. Let's keep doling it out an keep tabs on results.

It's possible you and I are talking past one another.

Adder, who can't think outside of his box to save his life, is suggesting we not use hydroxychloroquine until we have a study completed, which would be six months from now. And there are a lot of people just as fucking stupid as he is saying similar things. In which case there's a good chance Icky would have one friend less than he does.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Adder

It's good to know that your lack for judgment extends beyond politics.

The media isn't being "tribal." They're doing what they do. Ask the experts and repeat what they say. The skepticism isn't from the media. It from people who actually know what they are talking about.

You're too stupid to engage. Normally, you're a dimwit who occasionally says something right. Here, its irritating because this stuff is kind of important and you have zero capacity for thinking about creative logical solutions.

Please stop replying to me and I'll repay the favor.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Exactly. That's all I've been saying.

Like when you said, "I wish Biden had touted the drug." You be you, Sebby.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Adder, who can't think outside of his box to save his life, is suggesting we not use hydroxychloroquine until we have a study completed, which would be six months from now. And there are a lot of people just as fucking stupid as he is saying similar things. In which case there's a good chance Icky would have one friend less than he does.

I think Adder is suggesting that we let doctors figure out what work instead of taking treatment tips from the New York Post and politicians like Donald Trump and Joe Biden, neither of whom have any fucking idea whether those medications are a good idea for Covid-19 patients.

And there is *not* a good chance that Icky would one friend less than he does, because no one has any fucking idea whether that drug is helpful in those circumstances, which is why you just said that we need to wait for the research to be done.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Can someone please put that in Trump’s hand before his next presser? It sounds like it has at least as much promise as hydrochloroquine. We should try it ASAP, everywhere.

Umm, pay attention, he'd have to buy stock in the companies making it first.

As to US price, a silver lining in this tragic mess is we’re going to wind up with single payer sooner than later. This is kind of a Waterloo for private insurance.

Ayasure. Mitch and his peeps are going to stab their contributors in the back to do what's best for the American people. Yup, how he rolls. Not sure if you remember but the affordable care act is still being challenged in Court as we speak.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Exactly. That's all I've been saying. We're doling out the drug. Let's keep doling it out an keep tabs on results.

It's possible you and I are talking past one another.

Adder, who can't think outside of his box to save his life, is suggesting we not use hydroxychloroquine until we have a study completed, which would be six months from now. And there are a lot of people just as fucking stupid as he is saying similar things. In which case there's a good chance Icky would have one friend less than he does.

Defense lawyer talk. "We need epidemiology." In the history of medicine, epi studies are rare, double blind epi studies are even rarer especially when you are talking about potentially fatal toxins, but they are great to complain about when you want to keep your client off the verdict sheet 40 years later.

And in a pandemic, not gonna happen.

[Icky Thump]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Like when you said, "I wish Biden had touted the drug." You be you, Sebby.



I think Adder is suggesting that we let doctors figure out what work instead of taking treatment tips from the New York Post and politicians like Donald Trump and Joe Biden, neither of whom have any fucking idea whether those medications are a good idea for Covid-19 patients.

And there is *not* a good chance that Icky would one friend less than he does, because no one has any fucking idea whether that drug is helpful in those circumstances, which is why you just said that we need to wait for the research to be done.

Holy shit I am glad my friend listened to her doctors instead of people on the Internet.