ImageImageImageImageImage

Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine

Moderators: floppymoose, Sleepy51, Chris Porter's Hair

GQ Hot Dog
Head Coach
Posts: 6,493
And1: 4,060
Joined: May 15, 2006
Location: On the road...
     

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#181 » by GQ Hot Dog » Wed May 5, 2021 4:14 pm

Jester_ wrote:
xdrta+ wrote:
Jester_ wrote:
I don't think quoting an opinion piece from a leftist propaganda rag is the best way to make the point you're trying to make


Calling the New York Times a "leftist propaganda rag " shows exactly your intelligence level.


You're right, my assertion that the NY Times has fallen off a cliff in recent years in terms of journalistic standards and pushes extreme woke narratives as fact definitely makes for a strong IQ indicator :lol:

Remember "bubble boy" from Seinfeld?


First of all the NYT is the primary newspaper of US capitalism. Between it and WaPo, there are no general news sources more corporate in nature and more tied to one of the major wings of US capitalism. I hope there's no argument that the Democrats and the Republicans are equally tied to competing cliques of major corporate American capitalism? The NYT and WaPo are the newspapers of millionaires and billionaires. Of predatory imperialist wars overseas.

There is not anything "leftist" about American capitalism, millionaires or billionaires or brutal wars of occupation.

"Woke" is right-wing. "Woke" pushes a racialist notion of society. That's not leftist. Leftists reject a racial division of society. Leftists believe that society is divided along social class. The racialists in the Democratic party have more in common with their ideological ancestors the slave-owning class because let's all remember, the Democrats were the party of slavery and their current ideology is totally in keeping with that tradition.
Bob Meyers, June 7, 2018: "“It’s not in my job description to please NBA fans. It’s to win, end of story. I don’t need to be entertained, I just need to win. That’s all it is. That’s all I was hired to do. Win.”
Old_Blue
Senior
Posts: 628
And1: 162
Joined: Jul 02, 2019
         

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#182 » by Old_Blue » Wed May 5, 2021 6:15 pm

For those interested in being part of the solution (rather than part of the problem), here is a great county by county map of vaccination rollout. The darker the shade, the higher the percentage of residents in that county that have been vaccinated. We're on track to have 70%-80% of the entire U.S. population vaccinated before the fall, which would obviously be great news come the start of the next school year. Big ups to everyone who's participated in any way, big or small.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-19-vaccine-doses.html

Image
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,853
And1: 15,585
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#183 » by FNQ » Wed May 5, 2021 8:11 pm

WarriorGM wrote: The way it portrays hydroxychloroquine as discredited while calling remdesivir promising exposes its biases among a litany of other issues one can lodge at its door.


Think it had anything to do with the studies that showed that HCQ had no positive effects related to placebos, while remdesivir did?
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,853
And1: 15,585
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#184 » by FNQ » Wed May 5, 2021 8:18 pm

GQ Hot Dog wrote:"Woke" is right-wing. "Woke" pushes a racialist notion of society. That's not leftist. Leftists reject a racial division of society. Leftists believe that society is divided along social class. The racialists in the Democratic party have more in common with their ideological ancestors the slave-owning class because let's all remember, the Democrats were the party of slavery and their current ideology is totally in keeping with that tradition.


Agree with the spirit here but careful with that broad brush - there's a lot of intersectionality on the left and I'd argue that most leftists I see believe in both a racial division and a socioeconomic division. I think what you're citing here is more 'suburban leftism', which is comprised of a lot of people who's hearts are in the right places, but not necessarily people who could/should speak on issues of race. Because the idea of no racial divisions effectively argues that race has no meaning - which is not and cannot be true, even in terms of a utopia - and its akin to the old "I dont see color" argument, which is just pandering at its worst

Race does exist, differences between races exist, and I think the overarching point is that we shouldn't tie negative (or positive) attributes to a race/culture/religion simply by virtue of being that race/culture/religion. We can and should acknowledge that there are differences and that its often hard for a person of a certain race/culture/religion to truly understand the difficulties of being another.. at least IMO. Its such a subjective subject, there's really no right answer, so its up to the individual to draw their own lines
WarriorGM
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,975
And1: 1,917
Joined: Aug 19, 2017

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#185 » by WarriorGM » Wed May 5, 2021 8:31 pm

FNQ wrote:
WarriorGM wrote: The way it portrays hydroxychloroquine as discredited while calling remdesivir promising exposes its biases among a litany of other issues one can lodge at its door.


Think it had anything to do with the studies that showed that HCQ had no positive effects related to placebos, while remdesivir did?


Feel free to show these studies. There are just as many showing no benefit.

The World Health Organization does not recommend either HCQ or remdesivir.

Both do not have convincing positive effects. The speculative positive effects for remdesivir are about as strong as they are for HCQ and zinc. The recommendations given by health authorities do tend to be somewhat more negative towards the possible more concerning side effects of HCQ due to the association with cardiac dysrhythmia. On the other hand they do not take into account pragmatic real world factors like remdesivir being intravenously administered, costing greatly more, and being used in the general pharmacopeia for a much smaller amount of time than HCQ which is already standard treatment for rheumatoid arthritis and malaria.

But if you are of the opinion that remdesivir is so much better it's pretty clear where you got your news from.
User avatar
floppymoose
Senior Mod - Warriors
Senior Mod - Warriors
Posts: 51,598
And1: 10,507
Joined: Jun 22, 2003
Location: There is no public health without the public.

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#186 » by floppymoose » Wed May 5, 2021 8:44 pm

Old_Blue wrote:For those interested in being part of the solution (rather than part of the problem), here is a great county by county map of vaccination rollout. The darker the shade, the higher the percentage of residents in that county that have been vaccinated. We're on track to have 70%-80% of the entire U.S. population vaccinated before the fall, which would obviously be great news come the start of the next school year. Big ups to everyone who's participated in any way, big or small.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/us/covid-19-vaccine-doses.html


I have a hunch where the indian reservations are based on that map. I have a friend in Oklahoma who tells me that the indian tribe he lives near has vaccinated a lot of people (including him, and he is not a tribe member), but that other Oklahoman's are not very likely to want the vaccine.
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,853
And1: 15,585
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#187 » by FNQ » Wed May 5, 2021 11:12 pm

WarriorGM wrote:
FNQ wrote:
WarriorGM wrote: The way it portrays hydroxychloroquine as discredited while calling remdesivir promising exposes its biases among a litany of other issues one can lodge at its door.


Think it had anything to do with the studies that showed that HCQ had no positive effects related to placebos, while remdesivir did?


Feel free to show these studies. There are just as many showing no benefit.

The World Health Organization does not recommend either HCQ or remdesivir.

Both do not have convincing positive effects. The speculative positive effects for remdesivir are about as strong as they are for HCQ and zinc. The recommendations given by health authorities do tend to be somewhat more negative towards the possible more concerning side effects of HCQ due to the association with cardiac dysrhythmia. On the other hand they do not take into account pragmatic real world factors like remdesivir being intravenously administered, costing greatly more, and being used in the general pharmacopeia for a much smaller amount of time than HCQ which is already standard treatment for rheumatoid arthritis and malaria.

But if you are of the opinion that remdesivir is so much better it's pretty clear where you got your news from.


https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejmoa2007764

This was distributed to my wife and I, who work(ed) at a major provider in CA, and the information was disseminated to all employees, even ones like me who were working there solely to assist the overburdened nursing staff.

No, the positive effects of HCQ were not as strong. In fact, they were ABSENT when compared to a placebo

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2772922

So what do you do for a living? Because it sure as hell isn't in medicine and you sure as hell don't know what you're talking about. You talking about non-medical factors tells me a great deal as well.
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,853
And1: 15,585
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#188 » by FNQ » Wed May 5, 2021 11:20 pm

more studies about why STFU is a great option:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/10/new-covid-studies-remdesivir-yes-hydroxychloroquine-no
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/10/09/hard-data

Its the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics.. as if there is a large group of doctors who would conspire to provide inaccurate medical information after its been tested repeatedly. This goes beyond willful ignorance and becomes nothing short of malicious intent to justify political positions. All that nonsense can eff off. HCQ, with zinc (because apparently we need to confirm basic medical norms to doctors) was a bust and I'm sorry your crush pimped it. Remdesivir wasn't very good, but it didnt hurt people (HCQ did) and it did shave a little time off of the most critical periods, which is fine, but not sustainable.

But we're just medical people. What do we know? Inject bleach, I'm sure itll be fine.
michaelm
Head Coach
Posts: 7,186
And1: 3,052
Joined: Apr 06, 2010
 

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#189 » by michaelm » Thu May 6, 2021 12:08 am

FNQ wrote:
GQ Hot Dog wrote:"Woke" is right-wing. "Woke" pushes a racialist notion of society. That's not leftist. Leftists reject a racial division of society. Leftists believe that society is divided along social class. The racialists in the Democratic party have more in common with their ideological ancestors the slave-owning class because let's all remember, the Democrats were the party of slavery and their current ideology is totally in keeping with that tradition.


Agree with the spirit here but careful with that broad brush - there's a lot of intersectionality on the left and I'd argue that most leftists I see believe in both a racial division and a socioeconomic division. I think what you're citing here is more 'suburban leftism', which is comprised of a lot of people who's hearts are in the right places, but not necessarily people who could/should speak on issues of race. Because the idea of no racial divisions effectively argues that race has no meaning - which is not and cannot be true, even in terms of a utopia - and its akin to the old "I dont see color" argument, which is just pandering at its worst

Race does exist, differences between races exist, and I think the overarching point is that we shouldn't tie negative (or positive) attributes to a race/culture/religion simply by virtue of being that race/culture/religion. We can and should acknowledge that there are differences and that its often hard for a person of a certain race/culture/religion to truly understand the difficulties of being another.. at least IMO. Its such a subjective subject, there's really no right answer, so its up to the individual to draw their own lines

Not all that much genetic difference in everyone outside of sub-Saharan Africa.
michaelm
Head Coach
Posts: 7,186
And1: 3,052
Joined: Apr 06, 2010
 

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine hi h 

Post#190 » by michaelm » Thu May 6, 2021 12:13 am

WarriorGM wrote:
FNQ wrote:
WarriorGM wrote: The way it portrays hydroxychloroquine as discredited while calling remdesivir promising exposes its biases among a litany of other issues one can lodge at its door.


Think it had anything to do with the studies that showed that HCQ had no positive effects related to placebos, while remdesivir did?


Feel free to show these studies. There are just as many showing no benefit.

The World Health Organization does not recommend either HCQ or remdesivir.

Both do not have convincing positive effects. The speculative positive effects for remdesivir are about as strong as they are for HCQ and zinc. The recommendations given by health authorities do tend to be somewhat more negative towards the possible more concerning side effects of HCQ due to the association with cardiac dysrhythmia. On the other hand they do not take into account pragmatic real world factors like remdesivir being intravenously administered, costing greatly more, and being used in the general pharmacopeia for a much smaller amount of time than HCQ which is already standard treatment for rheumatoid arthritis and malaria.

But if you are of the opinion that remdesivir is so much better it's pretty clear where you got your news from.

By my recollection with remdesivir there was initial optimism after a premature announcement possibly from the company involved which affected the stock exchange, but the actual studies showed a minor benefit/perhaps shortening the course as you said, and there has not been much interest including from me since, hence I haven’t followed it.
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,853
And1: 15,585
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine hi h 

Post#191 » by FNQ » Thu May 6, 2021 12:33 am

michaelm wrote:By my recollection with remdesivir there was initial optimism after a premature announcement possibly from the company involved which affected the stock exchange, but the actual studies showed a minor benefit/perhaps shortening the course as you said, and there has not been much interest including from me since, hence I haven’t followed it.


there's still optimism there, just not by itself. The idea right now is that its basically the 1st step in a drug cocktail, because it has been shown repeatedly to reduce the window of COVID's efficacy. They are trying it with other antivirals currently, but right now its the only standalone antiviral that has shown a consistent ability to affect COVID's spread throughout the body.

The recent hot take is Hep C (HCV) meds combined with remdesivir would be an effective treatment, believing that HCV meds could be inhibitors for the virus' main protease.. last I heard, of the 10 suggested, 7 showed the possibility to bind with Mpro, and I think 3-4 of them are going into deep phase testing. The resident super-genius at my wife's hospital is pushing the idea of remdesivir and simeprevir (Galexos) being the best option in our FB group.. but that's all theoretical at this point. I havent seen any active data about HCV + remdesivir yet
xdrta+
Lead Assistant
Posts: 5,197
And1: 3,621
Joined: Jun 18, 2018

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#192 » by xdrta+ » Thu May 6, 2021 12:34 am

FNQ wrote:more studies about why STFU is a great option:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/10/new-covid-studies-remdesivir-yes-hydroxychloroquine-no
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/10/09/hard-data

Its the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics.. as if there is a large group of doctors who would conspire to provide inaccurate medical information after its been tested repeatedly. This goes beyond willful ignorance and becomes nothing short of malicious intent to justify political positions. All that nonsense can eff off. HCQ, with zinc (because apparently we need to confirm basic medical norms to doctors) was a bust and I'm sorry your crush pimped it. Remdesivir wasn't very good, but it didnt hurt people (HCQ did) and it did shave a little time off of the most critical periods, which is fine, but not sustainable.

But we're just medical people. What do we know? Inject bleach, I'm sure itll be fine.


We may not agree on everything basketball, but you are on the money here. The problem, as you say in your first sentence, is that people aren't swayed by medical facts, but by politics. If Fox News tells them something, whether it's that covid is a hoax, or the election was stolen, that is all they need. I doubt there is a fix for that.
michaelm
Head Coach
Posts: 7,186
And1: 3,052
Joined: Apr 06, 2010
 

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine hi h 

Post#193 » by michaelm » Thu May 6, 2021 1:16 am

FNQ wrote:
michaelm wrote:By my recollection with remdesivir there was initial optimism after a premature announcement possibly from the company involved which affected the stock exchange, but the actual studies showed a minor benefit/perhaps shortening the course as you said, and there has not been much interest including from me since, hence I haven’t followed it.


there's still optimism there, just not by itself. The idea right now is that its basically the 1st step in a drug cocktail, because it has been shown repeatedly to reduce the window of COVID's efficacy. They are trying it with other antivirals currently, but right now its the only standalone antiviral that has shown a consistent ability to affect COVID's spread throughout the body.

The recent hot take is Hep C (HCV) meds combined with remdesivir would be an effective treatment, believing that HCV meds could be inhibitors for the virus' main protease.. last I heard, of the 10 suggested, 7 showed the possibility to bind with Mpro, and I think 3-4 of them are going into deep phase testing. The resident super-genius at my wife's hospital is pushing the idea of remdesivir and simeprevir (Galexos) being the best option in our FB group.. but that's all theoretical at this point. I havent seen any active data about HCV + remdesivir yet

Thanks, interesting, I was not aware of that, there hasn’t been much need for anti-viral agents in Australia, which hopefully will continue although there are a couple of seemingly random cases in Sydney today as I post (EDIT not so random, traced to an overseas traveller). Would be rather expensive I imagine given the cost of the Hep C medications.


That Hep C can actually be cured now has been a major development over the course of my medical career, when I was a medical student it was still non-A non-B hepatitis and the virus had not been identified.
User avatar
Chris Porter's Hair
Forum Mod - Warriors
Forum Mod - Warriors
Posts: 7,359
And1: 2,393
Joined: Jul 09, 2004
Location: San Mateo, CA

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#194 » by Chris Porter's Hair » Thu May 6, 2021 1:54 am

xdrta+ wrote:
FNQ wrote:more studies about why STFU is a great option:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/10/new-covid-studies-remdesivir-yes-hydroxychloroquine-no
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/10/09/hard-data

Its the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics.. as if there is a large group of doctors who would conspire to provide inaccurate medical information after its been tested repeatedly. This goes beyond willful ignorance and becomes nothing short of malicious intent to justify political positions. All that nonsense can eff off. HCQ, with zinc (because apparently we need to confirm basic medical norms to doctors) was a bust and I'm sorry your crush pimped it. Remdesivir wasn't very good, but it didnt hurt people (HCQ did) and it did shave a little time off of the most critical periods, which is fine, but not sustainable.

But we're just medical people. What do we know? Inject bleach, I'm sure itll be fine.


We may not agree on everything basketball, but you are on the money here. The problem, as you say in your first sentence, is that people aren't swayed by medical facts, but by politics. If Fox News tells them something, whether it's that covid is a hoax, or the election was stolen, that is all they need. I doubt there is a fix for that.

I don't know whether I'd laugh or cry if HCQ fixed that.
Image

crzyyafrican makes the best sigs, quite frankly
WarriorGM
Assistant Coach
Posts: 3,975
And1: 1,917
Joined: Aug 19, 2017

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#195 » by WarriorGM » Thu May 6, 2021 3:50 am

FNQ wrote:more studies about why STFU is a great option:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/10/new-covid-studies-remdesivir-yes-hydroxychloroquine-no
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/10/09/hard-data

Its the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics.. as if there is a large group of doctors who would conspire to provide inaccurate medical information after its been tested repeatedly. This goes beyond willful ignorance and becomes nothing short of malicious intent to justify political positions. All that nonsense can eff off. HCQ, with zinc (because apparently we need to confirm basic medical norms to doctors) was a bust and I'm sorry your crush pimped it. Remdesivir wasn't very good, but it didnt hurt people (HCQ did) and it did shave a little time off of the most critical periods, which is fine, but not sustainable.

But we're just medical people. What do we know? Inject bleach, I'm sure itll be fine.


You're right it is the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics. But who politicized hydroxychloroquine? Was it Trump or was it his detractors? From what I can see it was his detractors who made a big deal out of it. Where did Trump get the idea that HCQ might be effective? Did he come up with it out of thin air? Of course not. He got it from Fauci most likely or maybe one of his other expert medical advisors. But because Trump relayed that information and became associated with HCQ his critics couldn't wait to see HCQ fail and Trump by extension. It's obscene.

Remdesivir doesn't hurt people? Maybe, maybe not. The negative side effects of HCQ are well-known because it has been used for a long time. With remdesivir who really knows what the long term side effects are.

Call me a Trump supporter all you want but I arrived at my conclusions without him and without watching a minute of Fox News. Your fixation with him shows your biases as much as anyone else's. Unsurprisingly you're using the same kind of cherry picking used in political discussion.

Your links are about the ACTT-1 trial but you ignore the larger Solidarity trial.
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4057

And you wonder why people remain skeptical?

There are many potential cocktail treatments that suggest themselves? Sounds great. But we've seen promising combined treatments suggested before. We need to see results. Good thing for Gilead that with the $3000+ per course it charges for remdesivir it will be able to fund such trials. Those Hep C drugs aren't exactly cheap either are they? $23000+ for 28 capsules?

What do medical people know you say? Maybe it is better to ask what they don't know and how out of touch they may be.

I wonder if using that money to buy oxygen machines, asthma medication and interferon might be more cost effective for more people in the world.
michaelm
Head Coach
Posts: 7,186
And1: 3,052
Joined: Apr 06, 2010
 

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#196 » by michaelm » Thu May 6, 2021 4:13 am

[list=]ii[/list]
WarriorGM wrote:
FNQ wrote:more studies about why STFU is a great option:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/10/new-covid-studies-remdesivir-yes-hydroxychloroquine-no
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/10/09/hard-data

Its the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics.. as if there is a large group of doctors who would conspire to provide inaccurate medical information after its been tested repeatedly. This goes beyond willful ignorance and becomes nothing short of malicious intent to justify political positions. All that nonsense can eff off. HCQ, with zinc (because apparently we need to confirm basic medical norms to doctors) was a bust and I'm sorry your crush pimped it. Remdesivir wasn't very good, but it didnt hurt people (HCQ did) and it did shave a little time off of the most critical periods, which is fine, but not sustainable.

But we're just medical people. What do we know? Inject bleach, I'm sure itll be fine.


You're right it is the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics. But who politicized hydroxychloroquine? Was it Trump or was it his detractors? From what I can see it was his detractors who made a big deal out of it. Where did Trump get the idea that HCQ might be effective? Did he come up with it out of thin air? Of course not. He got it from Fauci most likely or maybe one of his other expert medical advisors. But because Trump relayed that information and became associated with HCQ his critics couldn't wait to see HCQ fail and Trump by extension. It's obscene.

Remdesivir doesn't hurt people? Maybe, maybe not. The negative side effects of HCQ are well-known because it has been used for a long time. With remdesivir who really knows what the long term side effects are.

Call me a Trump supporter all you want but I arrived at my conclusions without him and without watching a minute of Fox News. Your fixation with him shows your biases as much as anyone else's. Unsurprisingly you're using the same kind of cherry picking used in political discussion.

Your links are about the ACTT-1 trial but you ignore the larger Solidarity trial.
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4057


And you wonder why people remain skeptical?

He is fundamentally correct though. There is some scientific evidence for remdesivir being effective, although not very effective, and none that I am aware of for hydroxychloroquine being so, just anecdotal reports. If Fauci thought it was effective, which I doubt, or some other medical advisor then they should have been the ones to talk about it in context etc. Trump tended to have thought bubbles like the totally ridiculous bleach and ultraviolet ones, and I strongly doubt he had done any rigorous personal research or had been rigorously briefed on the topic of hydroxychloroquine.

My own personal politics are very far away from Trumpism, but being interested medically in what was transpiring in the US I watched both Fox and CNN, and considered both to be politicising the pandemic imo, both seeming to me to be more interested in either exonerating or blaming Trump than in the pandemic per se. A divide on mask wearing along political lines was totally ludicrous from my perspective however.
michaelm
Head Coach
Posts: 7,186
And1: 3,052
Joined: Apr 06, 2010
 

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#197 » by michaelm » Thu May 6, 2021 4:20 am

WarriorGM wrote:
FNQ wrote:more studies about why STFU is a great option:

https://www.cidrap.umn.edu/news-perspective/2020/10/new-covid-studies-remdesivir-yes-hydroxychloroquine-no
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/10/09/hard-data

Its the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics.. as if there is a large group of doctors who would conspire to provide inaccurate medical information after its been tested repeatedly. This goes beyond willful ignorance and becomes nothing short of malicious intent to justify political positions. All that nonsense can eff off. HCQ, with zinc (because apparently we need to confirm basic medical norms to doctors) was a bust and I'm sorry your crush pimped it. Remdesivir wasn't very good, but it didnt hurt people (HCQ did) and it did shave a little time off of the most critical periods, which is fine, but not sustainable.

But we're just medical people. What do we know? Inject bleach, I'm sure itll be fine.


You're right it is the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics. But who politicized hydroxychloroquine? Was it Trump or was it his detractors? From what I can see it was his detractors who made a big deal out of it. Where did Trump get the idea that HCQ might be effective? Did he come up with it out of thin air? Of course not. He got it from Fauci most likely or maybe one of his other expert medical advisors. But because Trump relayed that information and became associated with HCQ his critics couldn't wait to see HCQ fail and Trump by extension. It's obscene.

Remdesivir doesn't hurt people? Maybe, maybe not. The negative side effects of HCQ are well-known because it has been used for a long time. With remdesivir who really knows what the long term side effects are.

Call me a Trump supporter all you want but I arrived at my conclusions without him and without watching a minute of Fox News. Your fixation with him shows your biases as much as anyone else's. Unsurprisingly you're using the same kind of cherry picking used in political discussion.

Your links are about the ACTT-1 trial but you ignore the larger Solidarity trial.
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4057

And you wonder why people remain skeptical?

There are many potential cocktail treatments that suggest themselves? Sounds great. But we've seen promising combined treatments suggested before. We need to see results. Good thing for Gilead that with the $3000+ per course it charges for remdesivir it will be able to fund such trials. Those Hep C drugs aren't exactly cheap either are they? $23000+ for 28 capsules?

What do medical people know you say? Maybe it is better to ask what they don't know and how out of touch they may be.

I wonder if using that money to buy oxygen machines, asthma medication and interferon might be more cost effective for more people in the world.

But vaccines wouldn’t be ?.
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,853
And1: 15,585
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#198 » by FNQ » Thu May 6, 2021 4:23 am

WarriorGM wrote:You're right it is the most asinine thing in the world when people turn medicine into politics. But who politicized hydroxychloroquine? Was it Trump or was it his detractors? From what I can see it was his detractors who made a big deal out of it. Where did Trump get the idea that HCQ might be effective? Did he come up with it out of thin air? Of course not. He got it from Fauci most likely or maybe one of his other expert medical advisors. But because Trump relayed that information and became associated with HCQ his critics couldn't wait to see HCQ fail and Trump by extension. It's obscene.


So hang on. Trump says something very stupid, its proven to be stupid, and then Trump's supporters still pimp it, even though it not only showed to not be effective, it had potential long-term damage tacked onto it. It was not, nor ever was, pushed by Fauci or anyone besides the medical fringe, because competent doctors will wait for studies. Clout chasers who want to be ahead of the game pushed it. Then Trump pushed it. Then people who took the word of Trump over numerous studies pushed it. And you think that the pushback on something that doesnt work was political? I'm sorry but that's the dumbest take on this thread so far and that is quite the mountain to summit.

Remdesivir doesn't hurt people? Maybe, maybe not. The negative side effects of HCQ are well-known because it has been used for a long time. With remdesivir who really knows what the long term side effects are.


It's existed 10 years, and here's a shock for you - we can actually tell when things are going to be bad long term. Its not magic. Things just don't pop up. We can see potential long-term damage in COVID, and that's been around 2 years. We knew about the long-term damage of HCQ well before this. Playing the "I dont know, thus nobody must know" card is.. crazy. I mean, frankly your whole analysis is. But this specifically is just baffling.

Call me a Trump supporter all you want but I arrived at my conclusions without him and without watching a minute of Fox News. Your fixation with him shows your biases as much as anyone else's. Unsurprisingly you're using the same kind of cherry picking used in political discussion.

Your links are about the ACTT-1 trial but you ignore the larger Solidarity trial.
https://www.bmj.com/content/371/bmj.m4057

And you wonder why people remain skeptical?


Havent gone anywhere near the Trump route, but hit dogs do holler, dont they

Hoorah that you come by your willful ignorance honestly. And no - not cherry picking. Because that study - at its core levels - said the EXACT same thing as the ACTT trials in data. The presentation was different. Don't understand? Not surprised and no worries - I've got you. The ACTT trials indicated absolutely zero evidence that HCQ was helpful. None. Bupkis. It in fact lined up with every study previous. Remdesevir, however, shortened the spread time of COVID in test subjects anywhere from 0 to 4 days, in a consistent average. It also posited that due to shortened time, that survival percentages would improve. The Solidarity trial REAFFIRMED that Remdesevir increased the timeline and helped speed along recovery, but did not find that it improved survival percentages. If it did in fact cure COVID.. yeah, we'd be in a much better position. It doesn't. It accelerates healing in people who would likely heal anyways, which is significant in that it lowers incubation time and lowers spread percentages.

Or in short, Remdesevir is useful in the fight against COVID, HCQ is not and never was, and the data you presented confirms that. You think its some accident that the term "impact on survival" being used over and over again?

There are many potential cocktail treatments that suggest themselves? Sounds great. But we've seen promising combined treatments suggested before. We need to see results. Good thing for Gilead that with the $3000+ per course it charges for remdesivir it will be able to fund such trials. I wonder though if maybe using that money to buy oxygen machines might be more cost effective for more people in the world.


That's why they are testing them right now. Of course, people will read headlines as you did, come to inaccurate conclusions, and then try and spread doubt in something that you have absolutely no clue about. So maybe there's some logic behind the idea of just treating symptoms instead of looking for effective treatment plans, because people are just too willfully ignorant, human representations of the Dunning-Kreuger effect come to life, to the point that even when we do finally make ourselves capable to control COVID, it won't matter because people will be too ignorant to believe it.

And if you don't believe me on that, I submit this thread. This whole country. Because we literally got to the point where we could control it last month, and were people actually interested in the truth instead of confirmation bias, we'd actually be on the verge of stamping out COVID right now and getting ready for normal life to resume towards the end of 2021.

Sorry to all who read this and hate the tone, but pseudo-intellectual BS like what the poster submitted is literally why we aren't returning to normal any time soon. And at a certain point, they need to be held to some sort of accountability. There's a reason they search for twitter, facebook, sports forums to spout this nonsense.. if there was any legitimate concern, any non-narcissistic reasoning behind, any reason beyond the need to feel intelligent for being counter-authority.. they'd be in medical forums talking with nurses, interns, residents, attendings - people on the ground floor who have the actual data. But they won't. Because the curbstomping they'd receive there would make my rant here look like Mr. Rogers on Ativan.
User avatar
FNQ
Retired Mod
Retired Mod
Posts: 54,853
And1: 15,585
Joined: Jul 16, 2006
Location: Parts Unknown
   

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#199 » by FNQ » Thu May 6, 2021 4:26 am

michaelm wrote:I watched both Fox and CNN, and considered both to be politicising the pandemic imo, both seeming to me to be more interested in either exonerating or blaming Trump than in the pandemic per se. A divide on mask wearing along political lines was totally ludicrous from my perspective however.


They absolutely were and you can see evidence of it in this thread on both sides. Two sides screaming at another because TV told them to.

Medicine should be sans-profit and sans-politics and in America its drenched in both
wco81
RealGM
Posts: 13,332
And1: 5,124
Joined: Jul 04, 2013
     

Re: Bazemore Doesn't Want to Have COVID Vaccine 

Post#200 » by wco81 » Thu May 6, 2021 4:39 am

Even Trump wasn’t pushing HcQ in the last 6 months he was in office.

When he got covid, he begged Regeneron for their monoclonal antibodies, he didn’t take HCQ.

Return to Golden State Warriors


cron