Give me a break. Evidence more and more shows that cloroquine is probably beneficial against corona virus, just as Trump predicted. This couple foolishly swallowed fish tank cleaner because a form of cloroquine was an ingredient. Trump never recommended swallowing fish tank cleaner.
Cloroquine is now being formally tested in several countries. Trump's enthusiasm may have been a factor in motivating more rapid testing, which hopefully will lead to more rapid approval and more rapid production. If the drug proves to be useful, then Trump's optimism may deserve credit for saving lives.
I wouldn't say that Trump "murdered" them because it's not the right description for what he did. But Trump is certainly being grossly irresponsible on this, and his careless ranting about chloroquine will both contribute to some people's deaths and ensure that others - who desperately need chloroquine for their existing non-Covid-19 medical conditions - will suddenly find it hard to obtain once the misinformed start buying and hoarding it.
Trump has no medical expertise and should not be promoting medical advice based on his own hunches. If his advisors who do have medical expertise believe that there's reason to suspect chloroquine might be useful for Covid-19, the RIGHT thing for him to do is use his position as head of the federal government to pressure CDC/FDA/the pharma industry/etc. to test it ASAP. By communicating with them directly, not on TV!
Saying he should "motivate more rapid testing" by going on TV and promoting it to the masses is crazy. It's so ridiculously irresponsible I just don't know what to say. You honestly make me despair for the state of this country if you think that's a rational thing to suggest.
Suppose Trump hears something about vaccines causing autism. Would you also agree that it would be no harm, no foul, if he suggested in his press briefings that parents should avoid vaccinating their kids, as a way of "motivating more rapid testing"?
Heck, he'd just be following his hunch. And apparently that's how the United States government works under President Donald J. Trump, right?
Suppose Trump hears something about vaccines causing autism. Would you also agree that it would be no harm, no foul, if he suggested in his press briefings that parents should avoid vaccinating their kids, as a way of "motivating more rapid testing"?
There is nothing so ridiculous that this president hasn't already done it:
Editor's note: This story has been updated to reflect the fact that the form of chloroquine the couple ingested was used in aquariums — and it was not a medication.
Layzej - Trump's comment on vaccines and autism was appalling. In 2014, he wasn't a candidate, but that doesn't excuse his ignorant tweet -- a tweet that encouraged parents not to vaccinate their kids.
The President and the medical community have different roles to play regarding chloroquine. The medical community have to remain unbiased in public, regardless of their personal level of optimism or pessimism. Trump has every right to express his optimism -- particularly since part of his job is to encourage the American populace. And, IMHO, it's reasonable to be optimistic, base on what is known today.
One impressive thing about Trump's handling of the crisis is that his actions had to face pretty extreme opposition from much of the media and many of his political opponents. E.g., compare President Obama's handling of H1N1 in 2009. I don't recall criticism from the media and Republicans.
Trump has every right to express his optimism -- particularly since part of his job is to encourage the American populace.
Here's the RIGHT way to do that:
"I understand that many Americans are worried, even frightened, about this coronavirus. It's certainly alarming when a new infectious disease appears and we don't yet have a vaccine or a cure. But I know that right now our CDC and FDA and our top medical research labs are all working round the clock to test every possible cure for this. It will take time, but we've got the best experts in the world running tests to find solutions that will stop this virus in its tracks and bring an end to the pandemic."
Having the president directly marketing quack nostrums to consumers on the TV against the advice of his own medical experts is the WRONG way.
One impressive thing about Trump's handling of the crisis is that his actions had to face pretty extreme opposition from much of the media and many of his political opponents
Consider the possibility that his "opponents" -- which include Democrats, Republicans, former members of his own Administration, and neutral experts from the epidemiology research community -- are criticizing Trump because they genuinely believe he is failing the nation in a moment of intense national crisis.
For many of us, this is exactly why we were so distressed at the outcome of the 2016 election. It was obvious from the start that Trump was not qualified -- by temperament, character, or abilities -- to lead the nation in an acute global crisis.
You're saying that to avoid hurting Trump's feelings we should all do what you do -- look the other way when he acts like a buffoon, compliment him profusely when he succeeds at achieving even the bare minimum that would be expected of anyone in his office, and just cross our fingers and hope that someone else will deal with any crises that occur.
Sorry, but I'm not going to stop telling the truth. We have a reality TV star, not a president, and he's demonstrating every.single.day that he's not up to the challenge of leading this nation in a time of national crisis.
Ned - I agree that Trump is mediocre. Sadly, most of our Presidents are mediocre. At one point in my career, I had some contact with the late Henry Singleton -- a brilliant physicist and a brilliant entrepreneur. I wish someone of that level of ability were President. In today's political world, we don't elect outstanding people. No President in my memory had much a science background. Many lacked experience in managing large organizations. Although the President is Commander in Chief, no recent President had appreciable military experience.
I disagree with the idea that opponents criticize Trump because they genuinely believe he is failing the nation. Look at all the criticisms that aren't so and all the media critical stories that are not so. Look at all the "gotcha" stories at Trump's press conferences. E.g., see https://sharylattkisson.com/2020/03/50-media-mistakes-in-the-trump-era-the-definitive-list/
And, things are getting worse. Biden is obviously mediocre. I don't think he could have accomplished as much as Trump in dealing with a crisis like corona virus. If you can bear it, watch Biden at https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/03/slow-joes-slow-pitch.php There is a theory that the Democrats will find a way to replace Biden with someone like Cuomo. I think they should do that.
Entropic - That article says, "Rather than soothing words for relatives of those who have died, or words of encouragement and appreciation for those in the medical trenches, Trump's daily White House briefings commonly start with a shower of self-congratulation."
Anyone who actually watched Trump's press conferences would know that Trump continually gives enormous praise and thanks to those in the medical trenches.
"He closed America's border to those who had travelled to China, a sensible move in hindsight." recommendations. In hindsight, Trump's action merely sensible. But, doing it when he did, was quite impressive.
I have some slight knowledge of how diseases spread. IMHO the Mayor of New York delivered a much more realistic assessment of the near future than President Trump.
I realise that as a Republican that you tend to see the good in President Trump, but his estimate that the US will be back to normal in three weeks is wildly optimistic.
More likely we will be going in and out of isolation for the next 18 months.
You keep saying this. What's so impressive about failure?
Trump gambled everything on a single policy: keeping the virus out of the United States. He failed. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are infected now.
And when it failed, he had no other plan in place to fall back on. Instead everything has been left up to cities, states, businesses, and individuals. Trump is standing on the sidelines saying "I take no responsibility" while everybody else makes the painful decisions involved in shutting down the nation's economy for an indefinite period of time.
In the hypothetical universe where Trump had succeeded then yes, his actions would be "quite impressive". But his signature policy -- his only policy for the first two months -- was a failure. Stop rewarding failure in the midst of a crisis with unearned praise!
Yesterday I began updating a set of 7-day trend calculations for new CV cases, new deaths, and new testing counts in the USA. For details see the first comment in this thread. The raw data are from here:
Here are the updated trends for the past 7 days: * New cases: 0.25 * New deaths: 0.30 * New tests: 0.19
The rate of increase of testing is well below the rate of increase of new cases and deaths, which is a bad sign -- it means we are falling further behind on testing, not catching up (yet).
The other metric I look at is the percent of new tests that are positive. If this metric is below 5%, it's a good sign -- there aren't many new cases out there. If it is at or above 10%, many new cases are likely going undetected.
Here is the mean percent positive for tests in the past 3 days: * Pct positive: 16.3%
Thus, over the past 3 days, it is likely that a substantial number of new cases are going undetected.
I'll keep updating these metrics periodically to see whether we (the USA) are making progress on testing.
One more comment for tonight: earlier today, I wrote this (in the previous thread) about rates of Covid-19 testing in the USA:
Extrapolating the week's rate of increase, there would be 85,000 tests today. If it's above 100,000, that would be a good start. To actually get this under control now, we need to be doing hundreds of thousands of tests per day.
Unfortunately, today's number wasn't over 100,000 (which I was hoping for).
It also was below 85,000 (the expected number based on the past week's trend).
Unbelievably, it was actually below the previous day's number (65,105 today vs 65,840 yesterday).
We need to be testing MANY MORE people each day, not SLIGHTLY FEWER people!
20 comments:
Give me a break. Evidence more and more shows that cloroquine is probably beneficial against corona virus, just as Trump predicted. This couple foolishly swallowed fish tank cleaner because a form of cloroquine was an ingredient. Trump never recommended swallowing fish tank cleaner.
Cheers
Cloroquine is now being formally tested in several countries. Trump's enthusiasm may have been a factor in motivating more rapid testing, which hopefully will lead to more rapid approval and more rapid production. If the drug proves to be useful, then Trump's optimism may deserve credit for saving lives.
Cheers
I wouldn't say that Trump "murdered" them because it's not the right description for what he did. But Trump is certainly being grossly irresponsible on this, and his careless ranting about chloroquine will both contribute to some people's deaths and ensure that others - who desperately need chloroquine for their existing non-Covid-19 medical conditions - will suddenly find it hard to obtain once the misinformed start buying and hoarding it.
Trump has no medical expertise and should not be promoting medical advice based on his own hunches. If his advisors who do have medical expertise believe that there's reason to suspect chloroquine might be useful for Covid-19, the RIGHT thing for him to do is use his position as head of the federal government to pressure CDC/FDA/the pharma industry/etc. to test it ASAP. By communicating with them directly, not on TV!
Saying he should "motivate more rapid testing" by going on TV and promoting it to the masses is crazy. It's so ridiculously irresponsible I just don't know what to say. You honestly make me despair for the state of this country if you think that's a rational thing to suggest.
Suppose Trump hears something about vaccines causing autism. Would you also agree that it would be no harm, no foul, if he suggested in his press briefings that parents should avoid vaccinating their kids, as a way of "motivating more rapid testing"?
Heck, he'd just be following his hunch. And apparently that's how the United States government works under President Donald J. Trump, right?
Suppose Trump hears something about vaccines causing autism. Would you also agree that it would be no harm, no foul, if he suggested in his press briefings that parents should avoid vaccinating their kids, as a way of "motivating more rapid testing"?
There is nothing so ridiculous that this president hasn't already done it:
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/449525268529815552?lang=en
Axios added an "update" to their story
Editor's note: This story has been updated to reflect the fact that the form of chloroquine the couple ingested was used in aquariums — and it was not a medication.
Cheers
Layzej - Trump's comment on vaccines and autism was appalling. In 2014, he wasn't a candidate, but that doesn't excuse his ignorant tweet -- a tweet that encouraged parents not to vaccinate their kids.
The President and the medical community have different roles to play regarding chloroquine. The medical community have to remain unbiased in public, regardless of their personal level of optimism or pessimism. Trump has every right to express his optimism -- particularly since part of his job is to encourage the American populace. And, IMHO, it's reasonable to be optimistic, base on what is known today.
One impressive thing about Trump's handling of the crisis is that his actions had to face pretty extreme opposition from much of the media and many of his political opponents. E.g., compare President Obama's handling of H1N1 in 2009. I don't recall criticism from the media and Republicans.
Cheers
Trump has every right to express his optimism -- particularly since part of his job is to encourage the American populace.
Here's the RIGHT way to do that:
"I understand that many Americans are worried, even frightened, about this coronavirus. It's certainly alarming when a new infectious disease appears and we don't yet have a vaccine or a cure. But I know that right now our CDC and FDA and our top medical research labs are all working round the clock to test every possible cure for this. It will take time, but we've got the best experts in the world running tests to find solutions that will stop this virus in its tracks and bring an end to the pandemic."
Having the president directly marketing quack nostrums to consumers on the TV against the advice of his own medical experts is the WRONG way.
One impressive thing about Trump's handling of the crisis is that his actions had to face pretty extreme opposition from much of the media and many of his political opponents
Consider the possibility that his "opponents" -- which include Democrats, Republicans, former members of his own Administration, and neutral experts from the epidemiology research community -- are criticizing Trump because they genuinely believe he is failing the nation in a moment of intense national crisis.
For many of us, this is exactly why we were so distressed at the outcome of the 2016 election. It was obvious from the start that Trump was not qualified -- by temperament, character, or abilities -- to lead the nation in an acute global crisis.
You're saying that to avoid hurting Trump's feelings we should all do what you do -- look the other way when he acts like a buffoon, compliment him profusely when he succeeds at achieving even the bare minimum that would be expected of anyone in his office, and just cross our fingers and hope that someone else will deal with any crises that occur.
Sorry, but I'm not going to stop telling the truth. We have a reality TV star, not a president, and he's demonstrating every.single.day that he's not up to the challenge of leading this nation in a time of national crisis.
Ned - I agree that Trump is mediocre. Sadly, most of our Presidents are mediocre. At one point in my career, I had some contact with the late Henry Singleton -- a brilliant physicist and a brilliant entrepreneur. I wish someone of that level of ability were President. In today's political world, we don't elect outstanding people. No President in my memory had much a science background. Many lacked experience in managing large organizations. Although the President is Commander in Chief, no recent President had appreciable military experience.
I disagree with the idea that opponents criticize Trump because they genuinely believe he is failing the nation. Look at all the criticisms that aren't so and all the media critical stories that are not so. Look at all the "gotcha" stories at Trump's press conferences. E.g., see https://sharylattkisson.com/2020/03/50-media-mistakes-in-the-trump-era-the-definitive-list/
And, things are getting worse. Biden is obviously mediocre. I don't think he could have accomplished as much as Trump in dealing with a crisis like corona virus. If you can bear it, watch Biden at https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2020/03/slow-joes-slow-pitch.php There is a theory that the Democrats will find a way to replace Biden with someone like Cuomo. I think they should do that.
Cheers
Oh, that is Sharyl “ Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi,” Attkisson, another fine journalist.
This is the present state of the USA from the perspective of the BBC's New York correspondant.
I debated whether to post it because it is a mix of favourable and unfavourable comments, then thought that an outside view is always useful.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-52012049
Entropic - That article says, "Rather than soothing words for relatives of those who have died, or words of encouragement and appreciation for those in the medical trenches, Trump's daily White House briefings commonly start with a shower of self-congratulation."
Anyone who actually watched Trump's press conferences would know that Trump continually gives enormous praise and thanks to those in the medical trenches.
"He closed America's border to those who had travelled to China, a sensible move in hindsight." recommendations. In hindsight, Trump's action merely sensible. But, doing it when he did, was quite impressive.
Cheers
David in Cal
I have some slight knowledge of how diseases spread. IMHO the Mayor of New York delivered a much more realistic assessment of the near future than President Trump.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-52028048/coronavirus-look-at-us-today-we-are-your-future
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-52029518/coronavirus-reopening-the-us-by-easter-a-beautiful-timeline
David in Cal
I realise that as a Republican that you tend to see the good in President Trump, but his estimate that the US will be back to normal in three weeks is wildly optimistic.
More likely we will be going in and out of isolation for the next 18 months.
But, doing it when he did, was quite impressive.
You keep saying this. What's so impressive about failure?
Trump gambled everything on a single policy: keeping the virus out of the United States. He failed. Hundreds of thousands of Americans are infected now.
And when it failed, he had no other plan in place to fall back on. Instead everything has been left up to cities, states, businesses, and individuals. Trump is standing on the sidelines saying "I take no responsibility" while everybody else makes the painful decisions involved in shutting down the nation's economy for an indefinite period of time.
In the hypothetical universe where Trump had succeeded then yes, his actions would be "quite impressive". But his signature policy -- his only policy for the first two months -- was a failure. Stop rewarding failure in the midst of a crisis with unearned praise!
Yesterday I began updating a set of 7-day trend calculations for new CV cases, new deaths, and new testing counts in the USA. For details see the first comment in this thread. The raw data are from here:
https://covidtracking.com/us-daily/
Here are the updated trends for the past 7 days:
* New cases: 0.25
* New deaths: 0.30
* New tests: 0.19
The rate of increase of testing is well below the rate of increase of new cases and deaths, which is a bad sign -- it means we are falling further behind on testing, not catching up (yet).
The other metric I look at is the percent of new tests that are positive. If this metric is below 5%, it's a good sign -- there aren't many new cases out there. If it is at or above 10%, many new cases are likely going undetected.
Here is the mean percent positive for tests in the past 3 days:
* Pct positive: 16.3%
Thus, over the past 3 days, it is likely that a substantial number of new cases are going undetected.
I'll keep updating these metrics periodically to see whether we (the USA) are making progress on testing.
One more comment for tonight: earlier today, I wrote this (in the previous thread) about rates of Covid-19 testing in the USA:
Extrapolating the week's rate of increase, there would be 85,000 tests today. If it's above 100,000, that would be a good start. To actually get this under control now, we need to be doing hundreds of thousands of tests per day.
Unfortunately, today's number wasn't over 100,000 (which I was hoping for).
It also was below 85,000 (the expected number based on the past week's trend).
Unbelievably, it was actually below the previous day's number (65,105 today vs 65,840 yesterday).
We need to be testing MANY MORE people each day, not SLIGHTLY FEWER people!
*headdesk* *headdesk* *headdesk*
Trump is suing stations that play this ad: Exponential Threat
Well, the “I don’t take responsibility at all” in the ad *is* out of context.
But Trump will lose. He wii call it a victory.
Local stations may prefer not to fight. They will just drop the ad.
Post a Comment