Coronavirus outbreak

[Gurn]

29 minutes ago, Kragar said:

How many are attacking him over the mere mention of hydroxychloroquine, a drug that already has the FDA stamp of approval and was being used my doctors (you know... experts) in other countries to treat covid 19.  To mention the drug, to give people hope that a medical treatment... is that such a bad thing?

 Drumpf did not just mention a promising drug, he named it and suggested people take it "What do you have to lose" is a quote.

Before even preliminary studies were complete.

So spit balling by Joe Six Pack is one thing but doing the same while the leader of a country is way different.

 

[Kragar]

4 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

You're making this about politics and support for/anti Trump stuff.  
 

This is him putting stuff out there and us responding.  Not us blindly attacking a man because we think he's an egotistical power mongering maniac.  That's beside the point.

 

My point is that we can't ignore some of what he's saying/doing because it puts the world at risk.  Eventually the borders WILL open up but I'm glad to hear our PM this morning suggesting that won't be any time soon.  And that he's not feeling too pressured by a man who's offering thoughts on how to combat this.  Leave the experts to that.

Quote

Because, in January, Trump wanted to restrict travel into the country.  What happened?   So why didn't he then?  Remember, he's the self declared guy who can do whatever he wants as President/an authority.  He's not one to back down and even fires people who aren't on board with his agenda.  He wants to restrict immigrants from entering his country...but that started long before this virus surfaced.  He was using it for a previous agenda, that's all.  He was in denial about the severity of things but it could have been an opening to shut the door and put up those walls he's been pushing for.

 

By March, Trump gets attacked because he wasn't taking this thing seriously enough early on.  Oddly enough, neither were countless other democrat politicians (of various levels) or the media that supports them.  But no, it's only Trump's fault.  Other countries have, for the most part, managed to stay on top of things and the US didn't. 

 

How many are attacking him over the mere mention of hydroxychloroquine, a drug that already has the FDA stamp of approval and was being used my doctors (you know... experts) in other countries to treat covid 19.  To mention the drug, to give people hope that a medical treatment... is that such a bad thing?  False hope is a bad thing because people let their guard down figuring "it's ok...there's something available to help us".

 

Or how about how he was attacked over the supply of ventilators.  I won't get into the debate over the state of the emergency supply resulting from the previous administration, but the death rate of covid 19 patients using ventilators  can get pretty high (80% in NY is probably the worst).  Does that mean that all the Dems and others criticizing Trump about not having enough ventilators should be attacked because they support something that might be worse then hydroxychloroquine? Where is the supporting evidence of "ventilators being worse than other suggested methods"?

 

All of this anti-Trumpism going on now is pure politics.  That is my point.  Actually, no...I don't give a rat's behind about American politics unless it is in a worldwide crisis where it becomes glaring.  Pro Trumpism is support for a man who's not really got a handle on his country...don't think ours should be following his lead.

 

^included for context

 

I'm pointing out hypocrisy.  This has been political from the get go.

 

If you read my reply to Canorth, you will see I mentioned that Dems were passing laws to prevent Trump from doing so.  Why would they do that?  Further, why would they do that, and then criticize Trump for not preventing inbound travel, the very thing they were trying to keep him from doing.

 

Other countries, like UK, France, Spain and Italy?  In February, what was going on?  Mardi Gras and Chinese New Year celebrations.  Were the fine leaders of those cities doing ANYTHING about the threat of coronavirus?  If Trump was so wrong about the threat, and everyone else could supposedly see this coming (according to some prominent media sources), why wasn't anyone saying anything about it back then?  Because they/we didn't know crap.  And don't hang your hat on Trump's gaffe about authority.  Anyone with any knowledge of the Constitution knew limitations on his authority.  And, since we're talking hypocrisy, it is interesting to see Dems paying attention to the 10th Amendment now (states rights and the limits of presidential authority), considering what laws shouldn't exist but do as a result of them ignoring that amendment.

 

Who says hydroychloroquine is false hope?  Some doctors continue to use it for covid patients today.  Not because of Trump, but because of their knowledge of the drug and the patient.  When used properly (which, in the VA study, it was not... not administered early enough, per drug guidelines), perhaps it is a suitable treatment.  And as for the idiots who drank their aquarium water, is it a doctors fault who mentions to a patient that they need more iron in their diet, and the patient eats hardware or cuts their tongue licking a rust patch on their car, trying to save money on the prescription?  IMO, anyone too stupid to self-medicate on their own half-assed interpretation of experimental treatments deserves what they get.  Trying to pin the idiocy of those people on someone else, someone who is clearly not saying to do what those people have done, is misleading and wrong.

 

For ventilators, these should be enough, but there are plenty of other links if you search "ventilator mortality rate":

 

https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2020/04/02/826105278/ventilators-are-no-panacea-for-critically-ill-covid-19-patients

https://www.physiciansweekly.com/mortality-rate-of-covid-19-patients-on-ventilators/

https://www.businessinsider.com/coronavirus-ventilators-some-doctors-try-reduce-use-new-york-death-rate-2020-4?op=1

[Me_]

46 minutes ago, Kragar said:

I'm not saying that is why he said it.  But the supreme idiocy shown by so much media that anything orange man does is bad is not appropriate.  Nor helpful.  And then rabid consumers eat it up... yay, something else to attack Trump with.  Why... because it is such a bad idea, or because of who said it.

 

Because, in January, Trump wanted to restrict travel into the country.  What happened?  Media, experts and Dems freak out, to the point where Dems were drafting legislation trying to remove Trump's ability to restrict travel (where had we heard that before?).  How long did it take for those same people to criticize him for not restricting travel?  

 

By March, Trump gets attacked because he wasn't taking this thing seriously enough early on.  Oddly enough, neither were countless other democrat politicians (of various levels) or the media that supports them.  But no, it's only Trump's fault.

 

How many are attacking him over the mere mention of hydroxychloroquine, a drug that already has the FDA stamp of approval and was being used my doctors (you know... experts) in other countries to treat covid 19.  To mention the drug, to give people hope that a medical treatment... is that such a bad thing?

 

Or how about how he was attacked over the supply of ventilators.  I won't get into the debate over the state of the emergency supply resulting from the previous administration, but the death rate of covid 19 patients using ventilators  can get pretty high (80% in NY is probably the worst).  Does that mean that all the Dems and others criticizing Trump about not having enough ventilators should be attacked because they support something that might be worse then hydroxychloroquine? 

 

No, it doesn't.  People are scrambling to do the best they can in a horrible situation.  That includes doctors.  Experts appear to change their mind every two weeks.  A month ago, my wife was verbally attacked by a UPS store manager, because she was wearing a mask.  A week or two later, there was a sign on the door, of that very same store saying customers could not enter without wearing a mask.  I hope that a-hole feels better about being a dick to my wife.

 

All of this anti-Trumpism going on now is pure politics.  That is my point.

 

So much wrong with this post.

Edited April 25, 2020 by Me_

[Kragar]

15 minutes ago, gurn said:

 

I  posted an idea a friend had to help combat covid, it was not well received.

In my defense neither my buddy or myself are the president of anything.

Thought was:

If alcohol kills the virus, why not vapourize  and inhale booze to help kill the virus?

I know people that vape vodka etc for recreation, and wondered if that would help or hurt.

Most thought it would hurt.

Ahh, ok.  I think I actually saw that, and the attacks.

 

I hope someone in a position to test it (officially ) has already considered it.  Not sure if it is a good idea or not, but I'm no doc.  Of course, it would likely have to be pretty strong stuff, so that could pose a problem.

[Kragar]

12 minutes ago, gurn said:

 Drumpf did not just mention a promising drug, he named it and suggested people take it "What do you have to lose" is a quote.

Before even preliminary studies were complete.

So spit balling by Joe Six Pack is one thing but doing the same while the leader of a country is way different.

 

Can people get the drug without a prescription?

 

Doctors aren't going to prescribe based on Trump's comments, if their practice is based in science.  People can ask for a drug (how much drug advertising is out there today???), but it is up to the doctor to do anything about it.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

lol at the indirect defenses of Bone Spurs.  He's an amateur grifter that doesn't deserve any benefit of the doubt on ANYTHING.  Forget his past acts, the current acts is enough proof.

 

Jeebus (pun intended).....Mike Pence has performed SIGNIFICANTLY better as a leader during this.  He's worked WITH the various other Federal/State agencies/departments as a leader.  To my knowledge, a number of state governors have acknowledged this.  And I'm hardly a fan of the VP.  The US would be doing worse without him 'cleaning up' Bone Spurs' mess as best he can.

Edited April 25, 2020 by NewbieCanuckFan

[I.Am.Ironman]

6 hours ago, Kragar said:

All of this anti-Trumpism going on now is pure politics.  That is my point.

Some of it is political, as always, but Trump has opened himself up to it. He lies and talks about himself constantly. Shows little remorse. He got caught mismanaging virus which has rightfully brought criticism his way. He has politicized much of the covid response. He spews off on tangents about things he knows nothing about (ie. medicine) which is dangerous to do in a position of power. The white house podium is not the place to spit ball ingesting disinfectant. 

 

Trudeau and Doug Ford are not the most well liked politicians amount their respective constituents but you wont find many people criticizing their approach to covid management, on either side of the political fence, because they don't do the things that Trump does. Compare the presence of Ford and Trudeau to Trump. Night and day. People give credit where it's due (Freeland, Dr Bonnie Henry, Ford, Trudeau) and discredit when deserved (Trump).

 

EDIT: I'll add Andrew Cuomo to the above list as well

Edited April 26, 2020 by I.Am.Ironman

[bree2]

10 minutes ago, I.Am.Ironman said:

Some of it is political, as always, but Trump has opened himself up to it. He lies and talks about himself constantly. Shows little remorse. He got caught mismanaging virus which has rightfully brought criticism his way. He has politicized much of the covid response. He spews off on tangents about things he knows nothing about (ie. medicine) which is dangerous to do in a position of power. The white house podium is not the place to spit ball ingesting disinfectant. 

 

Trudeau and Doug Ford are not the most well liked politicians amount their respective constituents but you wont find many people criticizing their approach to covid management, on either side of the political fence, because they don't do the things that Trump does. Compare the presence of Ford and Trudeau to Trump. Night and day. People give credit where it's due (Freeland, Dr Bonnie Henry, Ford, Trudeau) and discredit when deserved (Trump).

make you feel proud to be a Canadian!

[bree2]

14 minutes ago, NewbieCanuckFan said:

lol at the indirect defenses of Bone Spurs.  He's an amateur grifter that doesn't deserve any benefit of the doubt on ANYTHING.  Forget his past acts, the current acts is enough proof.

 

Jeebus (pun intended).....Mike Pence has performed SIGNIFICANTLY better as a leader during this.  He's worked WITH the various other Federal/State agencies/departments as a leader.  To my knowledge, a number of state governors have acknowledged this.  And I'm hardly a fan of the VP.  The US would be doing worse without him 'cleaning up' Bone Spurs' mess as best he can.

I feel Pence is just a yes man to Trump. the real leaders is Fauci  and the lady, I am no sure of her name. Trump should have just let them speak 

[Kragar]

27 minutes ago, debluvscanucks said:

I feel he's been attacked because he's dangerous at times.   I mean why ARE people "anti Trump"?....there are reasons behind that.  His actions are what people react to and it's ok to do so.  Blind following isn't responsible.  I was very much "anti Trudeau" until this hit but his actions have me changing that.  That's how it works....you don't sign on "for life".  You weigh out leaders as they respond to things, both verbally and through actions, then decide.  Which is how I do it.   Trump has yet to prove me wrong on him.   

 

Many of his followers tend to buy into anything he's saying so he has to be more careful with that.  His delivery is awful...he can barely put together sentences without going to his fillers..."great; greatest; best ever; biggest".  Put on a red hat and people cheer like crazy so he can slide through those moments.  But the words and, much more important, the actions are important. The hat was cute and catchy, but it's a distraction and empty words if you're not actually following through and making things great.  Right now they're not so great in the US.  But he rallies the troops of his like it's a Jerry Springer episode and he's a cheerleader more than a leader in my view.  It's a popularity contest and he has a following that, I feel, isn't all about his actions but often about his celebrity status.  At this point, Kim Kardashian could probably run and challenge.

 

Anyhow, won't change how I feel but it's VERY upsetting to me to hear people hide behind the wall of "fear mongerers".  So much that I just took a time out before returning.

 

I am fearful.  I have a Dad who's very vulnerable in this.  A son who spent time in an oxygen tent as a baby and has had two recent bouts of pneumonia.  I don't care if you don't understand my fear...it's warranted until I've been shown it's not.  

 

Don't criticize those who ARE fearful and therefore don't take their responsibility not only to family, but society, as a great one.  I got canned at work because of it...so yes, I feel strongly.  But my fear is no more displaced than those crashing around with confidence.  I'd rather be on this side of the fence until this thing is fully figured out and "beat".   Rather than prove something.

 

Going back to my happy craft corner but felt strongly that the message about "why" some of us are fearful is being trampled on.

How dangerous is what he says, and how dangerous is the filtering of his words?  How many statements are taking out of context, and used to attack him, when if taken in full context, aren't near as bad, or bad at all?

 

I don't like Trump.  I did not vote for him in 2016, for the first time not voting Republican at the top of the ticket.  But the extreme lengths taken to attack him through hyperbolic extrapolations of his policies, and lies about how illegal many of his policies are, and the constant legal hurdles raised up (and often easily overturned) to slow down those policies should lead one to look at the other side from time to time.  I'd be curious how many (here and elsewhere) actually consider the appropriateness of the Dem/media response, or are just quick to accept it because they don't like Trump.  I'm not claiming you fall into that boat, but considering how opinions in this thread have changed over time, I can't say the same for everyone here.

 

My own father, up in BC, is also very vulnerable.  He is about to undergo chemo for stage 4 lung cancer, so here come regular visits to hospitals.  I'm scared I won't be able to get to see him before he dies, because his cancer was deemed incurable and I have no idea how long travel restrictions are going to exist.

 

FWIW, I don't think you are fear-mongering.  There's enough of that around here, but I don't recall seeing it from you on the rare times I have been dropping in here.

 

I've pretty much said what I've needed to here.  There might be one more reply to someone else to make here (haven't read it yet), but life is sometimes better staying away from some threads.

 

Good luck with your dad, and a job.  Cheers.

[Kragar]

21 minutes ago, I.Am.Ironman said:

Some of it is political, as always, but Trump has opened himself up to it. He lies and talks about himself constantly. Shows little remorse. He got caught mismanaging virus which has rightfully brought criticism his way. He has politicized much of the covid response. He spews off on tangents about things he knows nothing about (ie. medicine) which is dangerous to do in a position of power. The white house podium is not the place to spit ball ingesting disinfectant. 

 

Trudeau and Doug Ford are not the most well liked politicians amount their respective constituents but you wont find many people criticizing their approach to covid management, on either side of the political fence, because they don't do the things that Trump does. Compare the presence of Ford and Trudeau to Trump. Night and day. People give credit where it's due (Freeland, Dr Bonnie Henry, Ford, Trudeau) and discredit when deserved (Trump).

He is an oddball, for sure.  He doesn't talk like a politician, and that rubs people (including me sometimes) the wrong way.

 

Who politicized first?  Especially in an election year, that is an important consideration.

 

I think many people overestimate his "dangerousness", especially when his words are filtered to make them more dangerous or wrong than they really are. 

But then, people overestimate the power and impact of the President (or PM for that matter) on our lives.

 

I've agreed already about the appropriateness of his spitballing at the podium. 

 

Edited April 25, 2020 by Kragar
for some reason, it posted before I finished.

[NewbieCanuckFan]

1 minute ago, Kragar said:

But then, people overestimate the power and impact of the President (or PM for that matter) on our lives.

I hope you feel the same way when a Dem gets elected Prez & has control of the Senate.....then happens to get several lefties on the Supreme Court.

[Me_]

4 minutes ago, Kragar said:

He is an oddball, for sure.  He doesn't talk like a politician, and that rubs people (including me sometimes) the wrong way.

 

Who politicized first?  Especially in an election year, that is an important consideration.

 

I think many people overestimate his "dangerousness", especially when his words are filtered to make them more dangerous or wrong than they really are. But then, people overestimate the power and impact of the President (or PM for that matter) on our lives.

 

Einstein was an odd ball.

 

Donald Trump is a criminal.

 

[-DLC-]

9 minutes ago, Kragar said:

How dangerous is what he says, and how dangerous is the filtering of his words?  How many statements are taking out of context, and used to attack him, when if taken in full context, aren't near as bad, or bad at all?

 

I don't like Trump.  I did not vote for him in 2016, for the first time not voting Republican at the top of the ticket.  But the extreme lengths taken to attack him through hyperbolic extrapolations of his policies, and lies about how illegal many of his policies are, and the constant legal hurdles raised up (and often easily overturned) to slow down those policies should lead one to look at the other side from time to time.  I'd be curious how many (here and elsewhere) actually consider the appropriateness of the Dem/media response, or are just quick to accept it because they don't like Trump.  I'm not claiming you fall into that boat, but considering how opinions in this thread have changed over time, I can't say the same for everyone here.

 

My own father, up in BC, is also very vulnerable.  He is about to undergo chemo for stage 4 lung cancer, so here come regular visits to hospitals.  I'm scared I won't be able to get to see him before he dies, because his cancer was deemed incurable and I have no idea how long travel restrictions are going to exist.

 

FWIW, I don't think you are fear-mongering.  There's enough of that around here, but I don't recall seeing it from you on the rare times I have been dropping in here.

 

I've pretty much said what I've needed to here.  There might be one more reply to someone else to make here (haven't read it yet), but life is sometimes better staying away from some threads.

 

Good luck with your dad, and a job.  Cheers.

Be safe, take care.  Thank you for a civilized discussion and making some good points!

[thedestroyerofworlds]

31 minutes ago, Kragar said:

He is an oddball, for sure.  He doesn't talk like a politician, and that rubs people (including me sometimes) the wrong way.

 

Who politicized first?  Especially in an election year, that is an important consideration.

 

I think many people overestimate his "dangerousness", especially when his words are filtered to make them more dangerous or wrong than they really are. 

But then, people overestimate the power and impact of the President (or PM for that matter) on our lives.

 

I've agreed already about the appropriateness of his spitballing at the podium. 

 

Should the words of a leader be taken seriously, or do we have to filter them, analyze them, or outright ignore them because we have no idea if the leader is being serious or not?   When Obama gave a briefing, did we have to wait and see if his words were sarcastic or not?  That's a big issue with TRUMP, you can't take him seriously.  And you don't need to spin them to make his words look bad.  He does that all on his own.

Edited April 25, 2020 by thedestroyerofworlds

[RUPERTKBD]

7 hours ago, Kragar said:

Too many CDC names to tag here, but this is for all of you freaking out over Trump's (and others') comments about using UV light and disinfectant internally.

 

Does any of you understand the concept of innovation?  Spit-balling ideas, including some really hair-brained ones, in the hope that something useful comes from it.

 

I'd be curious how all of you would have felt if he were to ever propose the potential benefits of injecting mustard gas or other poisons to attack the virus.  Hardly sounds safe or sound, does it?

 

I only raise it up because deliberate injection of mustard gases were the first attempts at chemotherapy.

If Trump was "spit balling" and "innovating", why did he come out and say he was being "sarcastic" afterward?

 

Sorry K, this is a pretty weak defense......pretty much Derek Pouliot level....

 

BTW: It's Harebrained....think "dumb bunny"....

[I.Am.Ironman]

10 minutes ago, Kragar said:

He is an oddball, for sure.  He doesn't talk like a politician, and that rubs people (including me sometimes) the wrong way.

 

Who politicized first?  Especially in an election year, that is an important consideration.

 

I think many people overestimate his "dangerousness", especially when his words are filtered to make them more dangerous or wrong than they really are. 

But then, people overestimate the power and impact of the President (or PM for that matter) on our lives.

 

I've agreed already about the appropriateness of his spitballing at the podium. 

 

Oddball is being generous.

 

Who politicized first? Not sure who else you are referencing, I am assuming the Dems? I don't know the answer but what I do know is 2 wrongs don't make a right. Whoever did politicize first doesn't give the other the go ahead to do it.

 

His "dangerousness" is hardly overrated. North America had the most time to act in response to covid. Trumps unwillingness to act has the USA atop the deaths and confrimed cases list... after having the most time to prepare. He put the economy ahead of peoples lives and it shows. The proof is in the pudding as they say.

[Me_]

As long as a President’s mandate is to destroy another President’s legacy, he will have failed as President.

 

Plus the Russian money that’s been supporting him since the 80’s; he’s a Russian agent. Look over here. 
 

Louis XIV said “L’État, c’est moi”; I am the State.

 

Trump is more like: “Le Coup d’État, c’est moi”; I am the Coup d’État.

 

The Muller Report is a very precious document.

 

Edited April 25, 2020 by Me_

[JoeyJoeJoeJr. Shabadoo]

One thing is clear, the mental gymnastics Trump supporters will resort to when defending the indefensible knows no bounds. 

[Gawdzukes]

23 minutes ago, thedestroyerofworlds said:

Should the words of a leader be taken seriously, or do we have to filter them, analyze them, or outright ignore them because we have no idea if the leader is being serious or not.   When Obama gave a briefing, did we have to wait and see if his words were sarcastic or not?  That's a big issue with TRUMP, you can't take him seriously.  And you don't need to spin them to make his words look bad.  He does that all on his own.

Exactly. We shouldn't even need to debate the stupidity of leaders based on layered politics.

 

Unfortunately you have to be educated enough to see through BS, not everyone can, and it's not even their fault really.

 

Obama was at least straight forward.