On chloroquine, Trump, and the <i>NY Times</i> — 13 Comments
It’s all a measured response to inflict maximum damage on Trump with emotionally labile voters.
First, claim that there is “insufficient data” that chloroquine is effective in treating/preventing the virus. This is to cover themselves when they claim that relaxing regulations on chloroquine was a massive deadly error (“we told him it was a bad idea!”).
Next, even though the drug has proven to be safe in being approved by the FDA for malaria, dissect the medical literature to find case reports (regardless if they are unfounded or disproven) published that say chloroquine causes certain kinds of cancer or birth defects.
Finally, produce someone before the election who was prescribed chloroquine for a positive test (or better yet, just for symptoms) who subsequently was diagnosed with cancer and throw him or her into campaign ads highlighting Trump’s huge mismanaging of this pandemic with the hashtag #HeLiedWeDied.
If they can convince enough people that Trump rashly let people get treated with carcinogenic poison (because he “doesn’t believe in ‘SCIENCE!'”), they can win the election. (I already saw a serious article over the weekend saying that chloroquine was poisonous–if given in a massive dose, only that the dose was massive was not mentioned).
Yep, Bloomberg News was trying to convince readers that hydroxycholoroquine will kill you — if you take a dose four times what is recommended.
The article details reports which are more than the “anecdotal” evidence Dr. Fauci refers to. He and Trump are doing the good cop, bad cop routine. He’s the pessimist and Trump, the optimist.
I was mowing my grass yesterday humming the words to “Cock-Eyed Optimist” from “South Pacific.”
I heard some medical scientist on TV in the last couple days address this exact issue. He was adamant. Combinations of drugs can be incredibly dangerous, he said. He mentioned more studies, but insisted that the studies have to be randomized.
That stuff is nice, but are these “not invented here” yahoos really willing to sacrifice other people’s lives over the varying degrees of drug certification, or whatever their real motive is? I just discovered that hydroxychloroquine is Plaquenil. Which means that my wife has taken the Plaquenil + Z-pak combination on numerous occasions in her life. The dosages could be different, but seriously; this has got to be one of the most community tested combos in medicine.
I saw a couple days ago that some Hollywood actor, Daniel Kim, had contracted covid-19 more than a week ago, was substantially ill, and made a full recovery. He made a public statement so he could specifically commend his doctor for using the hydroxychloroquine and Z-pak treatment and how excellent his recovery was.
The funny thing was that his doctor didn’t stop with two drugs, but also threw in some Tamiflu and an anti-inflammatory inhaler. That’s quite a cocktail. Good thing the patient didn’t die from such a reckless and potentially dangerous combination.
Or course, it is also true that some celebs and their doctors do engage in dangerous and sometimes fatal treatments.
Yes, Tommy Jay, some people seem to be suggesting that doctors in hospitals should randomly withhold a long-tested medication regimen, thereby choosing some patients for life and some for possible death. That’s ghoulish.
Drudge, Reuters, Daily Mail and others are reporting that a man died from taking chloroquine. NO! The couple in Arizona ingested FISH TANK CLEANER. This false reporting is being seen everywhere as a way to bash the president. This is enraging, despicable reporting. I am outraged.
Would those reporters take Clorox?
Are we going to survive this dishonesty? I am not so sure.
TommyJay on March 23, 2020 at 5:52 pm said:
… but are these “not invented here” yahoos really willing to sacrifice other people’s lives over the varying degrees of drug certification, …
* * *
Short answer: yes.
Print this article
President Trump is extolling his administration’s coronavirus response effort. To that end, Trump says he has massively cut red tape to maximize the government’s efficiency.
It sounds good, but Trump hasn’t done enough on this score.
At this very moment, stockpiles of masks, hand sanitizer, and other supplies are sitting in warehouses waiting for FDA inspectors to get around to them. Where other nations are expediting these deliveries, trusting proven suppliers in their deliveries, the FDA has resorted to its favorite fetish: bureaucratic lethargy.
The problem here is not simply that the FDA is insisting that its box-checking comes before exigent needs of public health, but also that the agency doesn’t have enough inspectors to get the job done quickly.
I spoke to one significant medical supplier who talked to me on the condition of anonymity, for fear of FDA retaliation. In one location on the Pacific coast, this supplier has had more than 20 pallets of coronavirus-specific medical supplies waiting in a warehouse for five days. Yes, five days.
At another depot in the south-central United States, this same supplier has had 500,000 level-three or level-four masks sitting in a warehouse for two days now. They expect the FDA delays to continue indefinitely.
And get this — some of what the supplier is delivering is supposed to be gifted to a hospital. But even in that case, the FDA has warned that the supplies cannot even be unpacked until an inspector arrives. If they are broken down before then, even if only to expedite delivery once the inspector’s approval is given, fines are threatened to follow.
It’s a joke.
Thus follows a critical question: Does this lethargic FDA response match up with Trump’s rhetoric? It does not. And as the coronavirus continues to infect more people, the costs of this failure of government will increasingly be measured in lives lost.
The president needs to pick up the phone to call FDA Commissioner Stephen Hahn and tell him to relax the inspection protocols for trusted suppliers. Either that or Trump can admit he works for the FDA bureaucracy rather than the other way around.
This was 3 days ago; maybe someone has lit a fire under the FDA.
Probably not.
“are these “not invented here” yahoos really willing to sacrifice other people’s lives”
The opposition *wants* a lot of people to die from CV because that is the only way to stop Trump’s re-election. Not surprising from the BAMN heirs to Stalin.
I’ll be fascinated to see how many prominent TDS sufferers take the principled stance of refusing this dangerous and untested treatment when they or their loved ones are going downhill and about to need a respirator. Sign them up for the control group, I say. (OK, that’s a joke. I know it can’t be a real control group unless it’s random.)
“my wife has taken the Plaquenil + Z-pak combination on numerous occasions in her life’–amazingly, she survived multiple attempts on her life by OrangeManBad.
This is all profoundly disgusting. Thank goodness the FDA has no power to prevent doctors using their discretion to prescribe an approved drug for an off-label use.
You made me laugh Wendy. Thanks!
Dr. Oz explained to, I think, Hannity on Fox that until they can do double blind studies of results with the various drugs, they cannot with certainty say they are truly working in most cases. He mentioned that there was a bit of enthusiasm for Hydro Chloroquine as a treatment for influenza a few years back. However, when they got around to doing the double blind studies they found it was no better than a placebo.
We are eager to embrace any possible treatment, and thankfully, doctors can prescribe a range of off label drug treatments. But they cannot say with certainty that the drugs work safely and in a majority of cases unless they get the double blind studies done. Would I ask the doctor for Hydro Chloroquine or Remdesvir, or Tamiflu or anything he thought might help if I was in critical condition? You bet I would. We have to understand that their is a difference between using these drugs off label due to anecdotal evidence and being absolutely sure they are safe and effective.
Breaking down the study done to date.
may have methodological problems.
But, as J J said, if it might help (possibly effective) and it won’t hurt (safe) – go for it.
It’s all a measured response to inflict maximum damage on Trump with emotionally labile voters.
First, claim that there is “insufficient data” that chloroquine is effective in treating/preventing the virus. This is to cover themselves when they claim that relaxing regulations on chloroquine was a massive deadly error (“we told him it was a bad idea!”).
Next, even though the drug has proven to be safe in being approved by the FDA for malaria, dissect the medical literature to find case reports (regardless if they are unfounded or disproven) published that say chloroquine causes certain kinds of cancer or birth defects.
Finally, produce someone before the election who was prescribed chloroquine for a positive test (or better yet, just for symptoms) who subsequently was diagnosed with cancer and throw him or her into campaign ads highlighting Trump’s huge mismanaging of this pandemic with the hashtag #HeLiedWeDied.
If they can convince enough people that Trump rashly let people get treated with carcinogenic poison (because he “doesn’t believe in ‘SCIENCE!'”), they can win the election. (I already saw a serious article over the weekend saying that chloroquine was poisonous–if given in a massive dose, only that the dose was massive was not mentioned).
Yep, Bloomberg News was trying to convince readers that hydroxycholoroquine will kill you — if you take a dose four times what is recommended.
The article details reports which are more than the “anecdotal” evidence Dr. Fauci refers to. He and Trump are doing the good cop, bad cop routine. He’s the pessimist and Trump, the optimist.
I was mowing my grass yesterday humming the words to “Cock-Eyed Optimist” from “South Pacific.”
I heard some medical scientist on TV in the last couple days address this exact issue. He was adamant. Combinations of drugs can be incredibly dangerous, he said. He mentioned more studies, but insisted that the studies have to be randomized.
That stuff is nice, but are these “not invented here” yahoos really willing to sacrifice other people’s lives over the varying degrees of drug certification, or whatever their real motive is? I just discovered that hydroxychloroquine is Plaquenil. Which means that my wife has taken the Plaquenil + Z-pak combination on numerous occasions in her life. The dosages could be different, but seriously; this has got to be one of the most community tested combos in medicine.
I saw a couple days ago that some Hollywood actor, Daniel Kim, had contracted covid-19 more than a week ago, was substantially ill, and made a full recovery. He made a public statement so he could specifically commend his doctor for using the hydroxychloroquine and Z-pak treatment and how excellent his recovery was.
The funny thing was that his doctor didn’t stop with two drugs, but also threw in some Tamiflu and an anti-inflammatory inhaler. That’s quite a cocktail. Good thing the patient didn’t die from such a reckless and potentially dangerous combination.
Or course, it is also true that some celebs and their doctors do engage in dangerous and sometimes fatal treatments.
Yes, Tommy Jay, some people seem to be suggesting that doctors in hospitals should randomly withhold a long-tested medication regimen, thereby choosing some patients for life and some for possible death. That’s ghoulish.
Drudge, Reuters, Daily Mail and others are reporting that a man died from taking chloroquine. NO! The couple in Arizona ingested FISH TANK CLEANER. This false reporting is being seen everywhere as a way to bash the president. This is enraging, despicable reporting. I am outraged.
Would those reporters take Clorox?
Are we going to survive this dishonesty? I am not so sure.
TommyJay on March 23, 2020 at 5:52 pm said:
… but are these “not invented here” yahoos really willing to sacrifice other people’s lives over the varying degrees of drug certification, …
* * *
Short answer: yes.
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/fda-inspections-craziness-preventing-coronavirus-response
This was 3 days ago; maybe someone has lit a fire under the FDA.
Probably not.
“are these “not invented here” yahoos really willing to sacrifice other people’s lives”
The opposition *wants* a lot of people to die from CV because that is the only way to stop Trump’s re-election. Not surprising from the BAMN heirs to Stalin.
I’ll be fascinated to see how many prominent TDS sufferers take the principled stance of refusing this dangerous and untested treatment when they or their loved ones are going downhill and about to need a respirator. Sign them up for the control group, I say. (OK, that’s a joke. I know it can’t be a real control group unless it’s random.)
“my wife has taken the Plaquenil + Z-pak combination on numerous occasions in her life’–amazingly, she survived multiple attempts on her life by OrangeManBad.
This is all profoundly disgusting. Thank goodness the FDA has no power to prevent doctors using their discretion to prescribe an approved drug for an off-label use.
You made me laugh Wendy. Thanks!
Dr. Oz explained to, I think, Hannity on Fox that until they can do double blind studies of results with the various drugs, they cannot with certainty say they are truly working in most cases. He mentioned that there was a bit of enthusiasm for Hydro Chloroquine as a treatment for influenza a few years back. However, when they got around to doing the double blind studies they found it was no better than a placebo.
We are eager to embrace any possible treatment, and thankfully, doctors can prescribe a range of off label drug treatments. But they cannot say with certainty that the drugs work safely and in a majority of cases unless they get the double blind studies done. Would I ask the doctor for Hydro Chloroquine or Remdesvir, or Tamiflu or anything he thought might help if I was in critical condition? You bet I would. We have to understand that their is a difference between using these drugs off label due to anecdotal evidence and being absolutely sure they are safe and effective.
Breaking down the study done to date.
may have methodological problems.
But, as J J said, if it might help (possibly effective) and it won’t hurt (safe) – go for it.
https://sciencebasedmedicine.org/are-hydroxychloroquine-and-azithromycin-an-effective-treatment-for-covid-19/
BTW, the MSM cannot bear to have Trump be right about anything.
https://www.redstate.com/bradslager/2020/03/24/press-invalidation-in-real-time-media-rush-to-blame-president-for-couple-poisoning-themselves-with-fish-parasite-chemicals/