Coronavirus **personal experiences** thread

You’re missing the point. It’s not a simple matter of determining what dosage & mixture with other substances is appropriate to be effective and safe. You approve HCQ and then wait for the chaos to reign as many doctors don’t come up with the “winning” combination, if at all. It failed in France & other countries in this regard so they abandoned it.

Politicization. “You can’t take away my freedom to not wear a mask!” That’s the difference. Ignorance. And arrogance: “Your wearing a mask is a political statement. Take it off!” PIC.

No other country has fallen into the quagmire of politicizing medical & earth sciences, like the USA. A certain someone has been at the figure head of doing that, unfortunately the POTUS, with grave results. USA has become a laughing stock to the international community.

In Victoria and I think most other states of Australia, flu season has been a non-event. A combination of high vaccine uptake in March/April and Covid induced improvement in hand hygiene, social distancing and mask wearing as suggested and/or legislated by state governments. Ymmv in USA flu season

Sigh. I know.

Yesterday’s Nevada super spreader is a good example of poor leadership during a pandemic.

I think there’s plenty of blame to go around, look at what some of the governors did with the nursing homes. In NY and NJ more than half of the deaths early on happened to people in nursing homes.

The politicizing of the sciences has been going on for decades. It’s driven mostly by the government grant money on both sides. As far as being a laughing stock to the International community. They have plenty of egg on their faces, the WHO is the biggest joke.

Attacking WHO and laying blame at their feet is in itself politicizing. A small amount of research on the topic will give a clearer picture rather than talking points. I agree that old people in homes were not protected.

Ah, the all-american political defense. “I can be a p.o.s. because I think you are a p.o.s.”

Freedom of the press is guaranteed only those who own one

Some nursing homes were ill prepared & didn’t react fast enough. Those became the showcase that made it seem like the entire collection of NY/NJ nursing homes were death traps. Just like the few protests that suffered riots, painted as the entire movement was violent (it hasn’t been). Of course, politicizing of science has always happened—it’s the degree of it. Especially on critical factors. There are still climate change deniers scoffing at the wild fires of the west in the USA, claiming “poor forest management”. No. Management policies & manning haven’t had any drastic changes. The climatology data is the only dynamically changing factor here. Droughts like never before seen in those regions. The WHO has its notable share of problems, but their interfacing with China was flawed. Not transparent as with other countries, and too much info directly given, without proper scrutiny. So the WHO echoed China’s messaging, the worst about their allegedly being “very limited risk of human-to-human transmission of the virus.” However, in 2003, the WHO properly called out China for its lack of preparedness & transparency. The organization does work & serve a purpose. It needs “correction.” USA refuses to lead on this.

To be fair, the governors in NY, PA, etc. were following guidance from the federal and state health authorities, who feared a shortage of hospital beds and recommended putting a priority on keeping hospital beds free for new admissions. The nursing homes were told they should isolate people who tested positive from the other residents. Many nursing homes failed to do that, for various reasons. Also, many nursing home residents were infected by staff, not by other residents.

Some states, like MN, actually had a higher percentage of their COVID-19 cases in nursing homes without an order from the governor similar to those issued in other states. That was in part because their health departments were moving active COVID cases to nursing homes due to the same concern about hospital bed capacity being inadequate to meet the coming demand.

If they were active covid cases then why be moved at all. Just because of their age?

Well 007, looks like this tread has outlived it’s usefulness. More politics than science.

See post #5657

So old people weren’t worthy of a hospital bed? Make room for a person that has more chance of living?

I think we became expendable.

No, the idea and direction from the authorities was to take stable patients who didn’t have the worst cases and transfer them to nursing homes so that hospitals could have beds available for as many as possible of the more acutely sick patients that were expected that needed immediate emergency intervention. We’re evaluating their decisions with the benefit of knowing exactly how many hospital intensive care unit beds were needed in June and later - but they didn’t have that information before then, nor did they anticipate that many nursing homes would not be honest or not be realistic about whether they were prepared to handle residents with the virus in a safe way.

The states were obviously not equipped with either the knowledge or the resources to develop safe, effective policies and implement them. But they had no choice, as there was no federal government program to address the projected hospital bed shortage, and little federal government guidance on the problems faced by the states.

This is an analytical video of politics in America by Second Thought on YouTube.
The comment section on the video also stayed very healthy, so I am not anticipating any flare-ups here in this thread. I will delete if things get dicey.

So pass the buck?

I thought we fought a war over State’s rights, do we need a war over State’s responsibility as well?

Using drugs off-label is done all the time.

But there’s a difference between taking no position and letting people (whose lives are ultimately on the line!) roll the dice that using the drug will cure and not kill, and absolutely forbidding anyone from using it at all.

A “non-professional” (non-EMT, etc.) giving someone CPR can actually crack ribs, and if done really wrong can actually puncture the lungs and/or heart. Would you favor banning CPR by “non-professionals” because it might do more harm than good, vs letting the person almost surely die?

There is, or at least should be, a sacred relationship between patient and doctor. If both are informed, and both consent, that HCQ and whatever mix of Zn and vitamins, etc., can help if the patient came down with the kung flu, who in Hell are politicians to refuse to let them go that route??

We’re not talking “alternative therapy” like proclaiming bleachwater and soothing music will cure it, but something that was tried and reported to work. Just because 25 double-blind studies weren’t done doesn’t mean that it shouldn’t be tried. Probably more people would die from lack of HCQ-related therapy than any who supposedly got the wrong dosage. And that’s political. Even if Fauci plays dumb and says “We don’t know for sure if it’ll work”, Cuomo mugs for the camera and absolutely forbids it.