Biden/Harris Discussion

Other discussions not related to the Permanent Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

Post Reply
User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by shekels » Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:25 pm

shekels wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:22 pm
Kbg wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:11 pm


Maybe, but if the purported cocktail works then I am not that cynical. Doctors would be using the stuff all over the world. To me you can’t argue both sides. Cocktail works or it doesn’t, if it doesn’t Yep we’re going to pay tons of money. If it really did pretty sureMost on the line doctors are going to do the ethical thing.

This I believe is just one instance of FDA Establishment denying the use of HCQ, there are more cases of refusals.
Also HCQ is being used off label and some pharmacy are refusing to fill prescriptions.
So from what I can tell ethical doctors are getting push back from the establishment for using HCQ along with Zinc/Zpak.

https://www.freep.com/story/news/health ... 360940001/
Right now HCQ is cheap and more abundant than some drug of the future. What is available to the 2nd and 3rd World Countries.

https://www.prnewswire.com/news-release ... 98030.html

But I am not a Doctor. I don't attempt to play one on the Internet so good Luck to us all.
Politics seems to be have dipped it hand into HCQ debate that is why I don't take the MSM at it's word.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Lonestar
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 189
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 7:56 pm

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by Lonestar » Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:47 pm

sophie wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:03 pm
I remember that Trump leaned on the FDA to authorize hcq use for prospective randomized clinical trials. But when reports of cardiac arrhythmias surfaced, the trials were stopped. There are a number of retrospective, correlative studies with mixed results but these aren’t helpful.

If Trump had ordered the FDA to reverse its decision, you can imagine how that would have been reported. Pretty sure the media would have trotted out the H word. So I don’t think he had much choice really.
I would think prospective studies, directed towards the indication of Covid, would take a very long time, even with out the apparent increased risk of arrhythmias. Retrospective studies of HCQ would center around outcomes for other indications. I was involved in the pharmaceutical industry all my working life, and it seems doubtful to me that a company is going to put it's head on the legal chopping block to seek FDA approval using retrospective data, even with a potential "black box" warning. What do you think?
User avatar
Cortopassi
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2419
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 2:28 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by Cortopassi » Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:57 pm

Lonestar wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:47 pm
sophie wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:03 pm
I remember that Trump leaned on the FDA to authorize hcq use for prospective randomized clinical trials. But when reports of cardiac arrhythmias surfaced, the trials were stopped. There are a number of retrospective, correlative studies with mixed results but these aren’t helpful.

If Trump had ordered the FDA to reverse its decision, you can imagine how that would have been reported. Pretty sure the media would have trotted out the H word. So I don’t think he had much choice really.
I would think prospective studies, directed towards the indication of Covid, would take a very long time, even with out the apparent increased risk of arrhythmias. Retrospective studies of HCQ would center around outcomes for other indications. I was involved in the pharmaceutical industry all my working life, and it seems doubtful to me that a company is going to put it's head on the legal chopping block to seek FDA approval using retrospective data, even with a potential "black box" warning. What do you think?
You are probably right. Just because it works for one thing and might work for another, you'd probably still need it to go through rigorous testing for the other, just like a vaccine is now.
User avatar
Kbg
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1807
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by Kbg » Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:36 pm

Again, contradictions. Hundreds of doctors have treated hundreds of patients, right? That’s how we know it’s so successful, right?One in a popular video claims over 400 by her a lone in Houston with what 10 doctors behind her? One can only assume they were legit doctors who agreed in front of the Supreme Court no less and are doing the same thing.

Certainly some pharmacies may be restricting, anything is possible. But isn’t the real question is it wide spread?

Pretty much anything is almost always possible...and this is a well known rhetorical technique used on people who aren’t super great on critical thinking skills. Personally my facts and evidence standard requires a decent amount of both. To be clear, we are talking probabilities, admitted. I just happen to like mine higher rather than lower. If you are into lower, super. Your brain, your life. Who am I to say how you navigate both?
pp4me
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 513
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:12 pm

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by pp4me » Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:53 pm

I saw a Youtube the other day where a Doctor said that when he has a COVID patient he asks them first whether they are Democrats or Republicans before prescribing medicine. That's because his usual prescription is for HCQ but if they are Dems he needs to tread lightly and ask if they are okay with that. Apparently a lot of them arent't.

Pretty sad state of affairs.
User avatar
technovelist
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 7154
Joined: Wed Sep 15, 2010 11:20 pm

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by technovelist » Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:56 pm

pp4me wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:53 pm
I saw a Youtube the other day where a Doctor said that when he has a COVID patient he asks them first whether they are Democrats or Republicans before prescribing medicine. That's because his usual prescription is for HCQ but if they are Dems he needs to tread lightly and ask if they are okay with that. Apparently a lot of them arent't.

Pretty sad state of affairs.
Sounds okay to me, as it should to both Republicans who think it works and Democrats who think it is lethal. >:D
Another nod to the most beautiful equation: e + 1 = 0
User avatar
sophie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4074
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by sophie » Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:58 pm

Lonestar wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 2:47 pm
sophie wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 1:03 pm
I remember that Trump leaned on the FDA to authorize hcq use for prospective randomized clinical trials. But when reports of cardiac arrhythmias surfaced, the trials were stopped. There are a number of retrospective, correlative studies with mixed results but these aren’t helpful.

If Trump had ordered the FDA to reverse its decision, you can imagine how that would have been reported. Pretty sure the media would have trotted out the H word. So I don’t think he had much choice really.
I would think prospective studies, directed towards the indication of Covid, would take a very long time
Not so. A couple of months at most, if conducted in hospitals crammed with COVID patients. No industry sponsor needed because the drugs are generic and cheap. In fact, I'm involved with a trial involving a generic drug (unrelated to COVID) right now, aiming to recruit just 10 patients. Research faculty and divisions generally have existing funds that could have been raided to pay for the HCQ & placebo pills, or you could have written a quickie NIH administrative supplement. IRB protocols were being super-expedited taking maybe 2 or 3 days to approval. If there's a big effect you don't need more than a handful of patients (maybe 30 or 40) in each arm - the trials requiring thousands of patients are because the drug has a minimal effect or only a small number of people are expected to have the outcome you want to avoid (e.g. death). That number would have been recruited in about a day in NYC back in March, where the daily new case counts hit 7,000. Then you just wait for outcomes, which is a matter of a few weeks. Given the situation, a report at 1 or 2 weeks, e.g. # recovered vs. still on vent vs. died, would have been appropriate.

If I were an infectious disease faculty member that's totally what I would have done. Sure, you could follow up with a bigger study if the small one was inconclusive, and you would have needed a bigger study (maybe 100 in each arm) if you wanted to see what happened when you gave it to, say, members of vulnerable populations at initial presentation.

I remember thinking that someone must be doing all these things at my hospital. I'm incredulous that this wasn't the case. There were some retrospective studies but those are honestly worthless for all kinds of reasons.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4526
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by vnatale » Fri Aug 14, 2020 4:27 pm

pp4me wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:53 pm
I saw a Youtube the other day where a Doctor said that when he has a COVID patient he asks them first whether they are Democrats or Republicans before prescribing medicine. That's because his usual prescription is for HCQ but if they are Dems he needs to tread lightly and ask if they are okay with that. Apparently a lot of them arent't.

Pretty sad state of affairs.
That deserves a huge: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Vinny
"I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats."
User avatar
shekels
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 519
Joined: Sun Jun 02, 2019 9:01 am

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by shekels » Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:24 pm

Kbg wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:36 pm


Pretty much anything is almost always possible...and this is a well known rhetorical technique used on people who aren’t super great on critical thinking skills. Personally my facts and evidence standard requires a decent amount of both. To be clear, we are talking probabilities, admitted. I just happen to like mine higher rather than lower. If you are into lower, super. Your brain, your life. Who am I to say how you navigate both?

When time is of the essence, you take your chances anyway you can.
With so many people's lives are in the balance.
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
User avatar
l82start
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 2679
Joined: Sun Apr 25, 2010 9:51 pm

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by l82start » Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:57 pm

jalanlong wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 11:13 am
shekels wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 10:15 am
One more thing I would like answered.
WHEN IS ALL THIS GOING TO END...
or
How much longer can we keep people in Fear and easily manipulated.
Apparently for a long, long time. I would have thought that even someone who is very scared of the virus would at some point have come to the realization that sitting in my house, living in fear and not being able to go to the movies or to a ball game etc, is really not living at all. So I will just move on and take my chances with the virus because life is short as it is. The idea of people just deciding to live inside and avoid as much human contact as possible in perpetuity never dawned on me.
my sig line from the last few months......
“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by an endless series of hobgoblins, most of them imaginary.”
Government 2020 - a BANANA REPUBLIC - if you can keep it

Belief is the death of intelligence. As soon as one believes a doctrine of any sort, or assumes certitude, one stops thinking about that aspect of existence
User avatar
Kbg
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1807
Joined: Fri May 23, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by Kbg » Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:44 pm

shekels wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:24 pm
Kbg wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:36 pm


Pretty much anything is almost always possible...and this is a well known rhetorical technique used on people who aren’t super great on critical thinking skills. Personally my facts and evidence standard requires a decent amount of both. To be clear, we are talking probabilities, admitted. I just happen to like mine higher rather than lower. If you are into lower, super. Your brain, your life. Who am I to say how you navigate both?

When time is of the essence, you take your chances anyway you can.
With so many people's lives are in the balance.

Pretty sure I’ve been clear I’m not anti. Just pointing out the inconsistencies of the conspiracy theories. Occam’s razor is a good approach to a lot of things.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4526
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Biden/Harris Discussion

Post by vnatale » Fri Aug 14, 2020 9:05 pm

Kbg wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 8:44 pm
shekels wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 6:24 pm
Kbg wrote:
Fri Aug 14, 2020 3:36 pm


Pretty much anything is almost always possible...and this is a well known rhetorical technique used on people who aren’t super great on critical thinking skills. Personally my facts and evidence standard requires a decent amount of both. To be clear, we are talking probabilities, admitted. I just happen to like mine higher rather than lower. If you are into lower, super. Your brain, your life. Who am I to say how you navigate both?

When time is of the essence, you take your chances anyway you can.
With so many people's lives are in the balance.

Pretty sure I’ve been clear I’m not anti. Just pointing out the inconsistencies of the conspiracy theories. Occam’s razor is a good approach to a lot of things.

CONSPIRACY THEORIES

3 Reasons Why We Fall for Conspiracy Theories

Conspiracies give simple and straightforward explanations for complex and dynamic events or situations, but they also foster distrust and impede problem-solving. Here's how to combat them.

https://www.entrepreneur.com/article/351093

Vinny
"I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats."
Post Reply