Originally Posted by Interstellar
Thank you. That means a lot to me.
Thank you. That means a lot to me.
WANTED: Sig-worthy quote.
Agreed. This is one of the problems with media in today's climate. What may theoretically seem "fair" often gives too much weight to the misinformation out there. But since so many in influential positions these days use their megaphone, it forces the media's hand (not to mention average Joe's) to take a defensive position. When you're always spending your time and efforts squashing misinformation, it allows those spreading it to control the narrative.
WANTED: Sig-worthy quote.
Absolutely. If ever you see some politician make a comment that is outrageously false and you wonder why, know this: he (or she) did so knowing it was false, knowing they would walk it back 2 days later, and know that by that time it would not matter since it would go viral and be used by others no matter that he or she walked it back. Damage done, and they walk away looking like they did the decent thing by correcting their (planned) error.When you're always spending your time and efforts squashing misinformation, it allows those spreading it to control the narrative.
I'm not lazy. I just work so fast I'm always done.
^^^
In re: truth vs. misinformation, as someone wiser than I once said: In a dish comprised of food and poison, the poison usually wins.
David
Happy with what I have to be happy with.
Hot off the press in one of the the world's leading medical journal: https://marlin-prod.literatumonline....3620311806.pdf
Let's see how they try to reject this one.
I'm not lazy. I just work so fast I'm always done.
For the TL: DR crowd:
"Interpretation We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. Each of these drug regimens was associated with decreased in-hospital survival and an increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID-19."
"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."
-- Aristotle
Nostalgia, you know, ain't what it used to be. Furthermore, they tells me, it never was.
“A Man Who Does Not Read Has No Appreciable Advantage Over the Man Who Cannot Read” - Mark Twain
Thank you Dana..I think it's important to present all information for discussion either pro or con, because I believe it's more important to find out the truth as to whether this drug actually can save lives, rather than proving Trump wrong. I could care less about that..if one life can be saved by it's use, I'm for that. I would like to reiterate, I am not a Trump supporter, I only search for the truth, and I don't care if that truth is spoken by a liberal, conservative or a monk in Tibet.
I honestly tried understanding the details listed in the pdf you linked, and I got lost and couldn't make a conclusion from the information provided.
As I do with most information, I am already suspicious of the agenda of any source claiming to know the truth. So I usually try to seek out other data as to whether the info is slanted from a liberal or conservative perspective, because it's very easy for both sides to justify their position by simply leaving out other data and provide only what furthers their version of the truth.
As I said, I couldn't make a determination from this study based on the way the data was presented..not their fault, I just became confused. I'm retired now and my brain is usually taking a nap half of the day. lol It's very possible this study has made the conclusion it's not effective, and it should be placed in a pile with any other study, where the data is either inconclusive, effective or not effective, and at some point enough data will exist where we will know the truth.
I personally think this virus has so many characteristics, it changes, it weaves and turns, and what we know today, may be different tomorrow as it's had more time to evolve even further.
In the meantime, I'm still searching more information on The Lancet,
update: seems Dr Richard Horton Editor in Chief of the Lancet is not afraid to inject politics into the publication
Here's an open letter written to Dr Horton regarding another study he published.
https://www.virology.ws/2015/11/13/a...nd-the-lancet/
Last edited by Top Cat; 05-22-2020 at 12:42 PM.
Soundcloud page: Richard Hermans, musical meanderings https://soundcloud.com/precipice YouTube: [https://www.youtube.com/@richardhermans4457
If one life can be saved by it's use, but it made several lives worse (which is what a huge study out just concluded), then I'm not for that. I don't think you are either, but I just wanted to state it.
But I absolutely agree with your point. These media sources should publish the article without referencing Trump's support for it. That's the very definition of spending more time trying to prove misinformation than letting the study stand on its own.
Like you said, those articles should be for people like you and I to take in and parse and mindful consumers of information. For those who refuse to change their mind, it really doesn't matter what you publish.
And if the overwhelming evidence supports the drug should not be used then it's the pharma industry, CDC, physicians, and pharmacists that have an obligation to make sure it's not misused or prescribed.
WANTED: Sig-worthy quote.
I don't advocate any person taking this as a preventative measure for Covid19. I don't think there is substantial data to suggest it works in that way, other than personal testimony, but unless the results were verified in a study, there is no way of knowing if it's coincidence or not.
But regarding one life saved, it was in the context of under the medical supervision by a Dr familiar with the patient's medical history and offered as an option in those cases where fatality is a possiblity and other treatment has not responded.(I believe this is also the FDA's reason for approval, but only under those guidelines).
Some patients have responded to the medication and fully recovered. Others may not recover when all treatment options have been exhausted, but it's worth the risk at that stage in my opinion.
Just wanted to make my comments clearer.
Soundcloud page: Richard Hermans, musical meanderings https://soundcloud.com/precipice YouTube: [https://www.youtube.com/@richardhermans4457
^^ That's all fine and dandy, but you guys are far more analytical than the average person. Considering that there are many people out there who will blindly follow their leaders, it's vital that those leaders be called out if they are doing something that the overwhelming expert community advises against. Especially since they wield great influence over those who are, shall we say, less analytical, or just fucking gullible fools and lemmings.
So, let's not blame the media for pointing out what's obvious to us, but not necessarily so clear to others. And, if the president is being recklessly selfish by doing something so stupid (even if he is lying about it, which he clearly is), then it is newsworthy and worthy of being reported. Reporting it doesn't necessarily make it political.
"The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"
We would love to live in a perfect world, where our leaders, entertainers, sports figures, etc don't do stupid things and stupid people copy what they do and also do stupid things because of it.
I'm reminded of when the 3 Stooges were in reruns and a new generation discovered them. There was an outcry that scenes which depicted Moe banging Curly on the head with a hammer or scraping a saw across his head would lead to children harming one another in like fashion, and the 3 Stooges videos should be banned.
I don't think there is any question in the majority of people's minds, Trump says and does things without filtering himself, it's what we've got, nothing will change it.
If you think Trump is bad about speaking unfiltered, read the way Harry Truman used to speak publicly..lol
But the press has been all over Trump about it, and if people haven't heard a million times already that you shouldn't take it without a Dr's prescription and care, then I don't know what to say.
I don't want to get into the media thing again, because I feel I'm a broken record, or at least one with a very deep scratch in it where I keep voicing my distrust of the media(although I thank you again for the link you provided).
And I'm trying to be the new and improved Top Cat. lol
Last edited by Top Cat; 05-22-2020 at 02:54 PM.
Soundcloud page: Richard Hermans, musical meanderings https://soundcloud.com/precipice YouTube: [https://www.youtube.com/@richardhermans4457
^^ A lot of people are fucking idiots and need to be told over and over and over again before it sinks in.
"The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"
Don't follow leaders, watch the parkin' meters (His Bob'ness)
Topcat- let me make the study a bit easier to follow. What they did was a retrospective review of 96000 cases of Covid, looking at all the factors that went into care and prognosis for everybody whose data they looked at. This is an ethically and scientifically sound approach to analyzing large pools of patient data, especially when using de-identified information. In doing their research, they used a multivariable analysis- which makes sense since there are so many variables to consider. Figures 2 and 3 are called forest plots, and they provide you information about risk factors for mortality (fig. 2, with predictors of mortality to the right of the line of no effect) and for arrhythmia (figure 3, same). Each entry in those two figures shows the mean (small box) and 95% confidence intervals (the arms out to the sides, best way to understand this- if we did this 100 times, 95 times the mean value would fall somewhere between the two arms on either side- smaller arms means a more precise measure).
Cutting to the chase, the highest risk factors for mortality was use of the drug, in two combinations! The highest risk, of all the risks! Higher than even CHF or CAD. It is pretty darned clear here.
BTW, Richard Horton has always been outspoken, but is also editor for one of the world's most rigorous and important medical journals. He does not sit by while others misinterpret data. I've met him in the past. https://www.who.int/woman_child_acco...ers/horton/en/
I'm not lazy. I just work so fast I'm always done.
I totally get your point. But it's been done to death. It doesn't have to be the center of the story. When CNN (for example) frames the discussion in terms of Trump, that unfortunately turns off those who might listen otherwise. I was watching this morning and the lower third read "Drug that Trump touts and takes is discredited (or something) in new study". The focus of the story should be the study.We agree.True - if ever. But as I said earlier, the burden is not on the idiots but those that provide access to the drug to do their job.
WANTED: Sig-worthy quote.
A little bit of well placed humor is always appreciated
Dana, thank you for the explanation, I appreciate it. And also for commenting in a respectful non condescending way.
Richard does seem to wear his passion on his sleeves, doesn't he? In my research I came across an article he wrote for the Lancet about the Extinction Rebellion movement and that passion is clearly evident there.
That's great you've met him, and I'll check out the link when I have more time.
Thanks again.
Soundcloud page: Richard Hermans, musical meanderings https://soundcloud.com/precipice YouTube: [https://www.youtube.com/@richardhermans4457
I think the "it's been done to death" point only has merit to those who are following this religiously. For example, I'm a news junkie. All the shit that's on TV at night is old news to me. Most people barely pay attention to the news. So, if CNN repeats it 20 times a day, most will only see it once, if even that often. Hell, I know people who think the local news is the only thing to watch. I guess they like the 30-minute broadcasts with two weather forecasts, a ten-minute sports update, local trivialities and "the world on two minutes."
We have to see things the way other audiences see them, not necessarily the way we do, if we're in the group that's tuned in all the time. For example, I'm in marketing communications. A client of mine wanted to change their business tagline. Why? because they were getting tired of it after two years. I had to remind them that their audience isn't around it every day like they are. In fact, it's probably just beginning to resonate in their market. They need to see things the way their market does. That's why I tell my clients that it's my job to poke holes in the bubble.
"The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"
Welcome!Dana, thank you for the explanation, I appreciate it. And also for commenting in a respectful non condescending way.
In real life, I teach a course in evidence-based practice, and have been a biomedical editor for nearly 40 years. (I am a chiropractor with master's degrees in medical education and in bioethics and health policy) The thrust of my course in EBM is to teach students how to extract and interpret information in scientific papers. They are dense and hard to read, at times, so how can clinicians apply the information if they cannot understand what they are reading? So, for example, you don't know how to calculate a 95% confidence interval, just understand what it means when you see it. Most Americans lack the training to understand the scientific literature and then are led to believe that you cannot trust it anyway- the big pharma argument is always there, as is the distrust of experts.
I am in process of analyzing on a survey I did with a small group of chiropractors looking at how Covid has been perceived by my profession- what impact has it had on practice, what stressors have occurred during the shutdown, how we should advertise whether or not chiropractic can impact Covid (No! But not everyone feels that way...). My life is spent reading the literature. This is why I get so frustrated at all the comments I see in the world about what people think is true or not true and about the relativism that seems to exist as a result. Some things just are. Wear the damned mask, for example. Any discussion of it creating problems is not based on good science- but there is always counter-science out there, used only to advance political positions.
Anyway! My problem is finding ways to explain scientific information to people, in a way where I do not speak over their head. This is one of my papers (Hey, how often do I get to humblebrag!): https://chiromt.biomedcentral.com/ar...045-709X-21-43
I'm not lazy. I just work so fast I'm always done.
It is absolutely central to the story that US national (and arguably world or what used to be world) leadership consistently lies about life and death matters like the safety of medications and the availability of testing, ignores repeated security briefings, and constantly politicizes its actions, even corrupting the CDC rather than formulating fact-based rational policies based on scientific consensus while silencing, reassigning or firing scientists trying to protect us, utterly failing in their initial response when it is most vital resulting in tens of thousands of avoidable deaths and completely abrogates it's responsibility at the federal level, largely ignores emergency management expertise in favor of nepotism and amateurism, and unbelievably, shockingly still, still has no coherent and comprehensive national plan whatsoever.
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion but not their own facts or alternate reality.
- Why has the CDC been sidelined and no longer holds press briefings?
- Why is that even though the US was better prepared (according to a comprehensive two-year JHS study) than any other nation yet has about 4% of the worlds population and nearly a third of all reported cases?
This is an outrage of historic proportions and the awful truth remains whether we acknowledge it or not. It will not due to attack the bearer of bad new or reduce it to same tired accusations of political partisanship or other lazy responses. If you disagree then provide and argument backed by credible, reasonably accurate information, site sources rather than make assertions. If I am mistaken I want to know. Let's have the truth! How about taking the time to seriously think about the situation and read beyond the headlines? The gravity of the situation demands no less. If you don't understand the problem you can't fix it. If nobody is interested in that then close the $*$%#! thread.
^ This x 1000
I'm interested.
I'm not lazy. I just work so fast I'm always done.
We are in the same business and I do this all the time with clients, so I totally relate to what you are saying. And “seeing things the way other audiences see them” was a key component of my posts on the media and media perception a few days back.
WANTED: Sig-worthy quote.
At a certain point, the reactive pablum of “having to hear all sides of the story” is basically a soft pedaling of defending the indefensible.
That doesn’t serve any greater good or promote fairness.
To be clear, I wasn’t referring to the comment above. I respect how this thread has been handled. But as was pointed out before 2+2 is always going to equal 4. Not 5, etc.
Last edited by Rye-Ergot; 05-22-2020 at 07:56 PM.
X1000
The only "sides" I see are the right and wrong sides of history.
If it weren't for the loss of life, one can make an argument that what is happening in Washington is bigger than COVID and will do more-lasting damage.
WRT media coverage, if one relies on mainstream media, yes, it is relentless obsession with COVID. There is other important news that isn't getting covered. But, there are plenty of news sources that inform. One has to do more than watch cable news and skim the headlines. There are many other things the US government is doing that would shock most people. COVID is a nice distraction for them while they go about dismantling our protections. And the MSM plays right into their hands.
"The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"
Not trying to offend anyone, just trying to understand why the situation in USA apparently is worse than over here. You can't blame the president for everything?
Isn't the situation in USA (besides the presidential management) difficult because the state/government is weak, and the americans are VERY diverse ?
Almost like India...?
You have 50 states with different legislation, cultures, 'leadership', generally not much help or security to poor people, and a general state of education where people dont know whats going on outside US, and don't know the difference between a Lego kit and a defibrillator. And many hates authorities.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...e_iOSApp_Other
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks