CORONA Peter Navarro Explodes At Fauci In Heated Showdown Over Hydroxychloroquine

straightstreet

straightstreet

Life is better in flip flops
TidesofTruth said:
I WANT HIM GONE!

He may be a good doctor, maybe not but he is an idiot at math and economics. He said he would like everybody on lockdown UNTIL THERE ARE NO MORE DEATHS?!?!??!?!

Little hitler syndrome.
Click to expand...
www.foxnews.com

Fauci says world may never return back to normal after coronavirus outbreak

Dr. Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, told a coronavirus press briefing on Monday that the world may never return to the “normal” that was known before the outbreak.
www.foxnews.com www.foxnews.com
 
WFK

WFK

Senior Something
Snyper said:
95% of those people would likely have recovered anyway.
Click to expand...
Well, being in the "risk" group, the 5% NOT recovered worry me more than the 95%.
This is not a game of statistics. It is a matter of a percentage living or not, even if less than 5%.
I think there are more doctors who claim such success. Are they lying?
If not, why are their findings minimized?
 
Snyper

Snyper

Veteran Member
WFK said:
This is not a game of statistics.
Click to expand...
It is when trying to prove the efficacy of drug treatments.

WFK said:
I think there are more doctors who claim such success. Are they lying?
Click to expand...
The percentages claiming "success" are low.
There's not enough verifiable data to be certain.

They aren't necessarily "lying" but what they are saying doesn't constitute actual proof unless they can show large numbers of patients under controlled circumstances.

What we have now is lots of anecdotes.
 
WFK

WFK

Senior Something
Snyper said:
It is when trying to prove the efficacy of drug treatments.


The percentages claiming "success" are low.
There's not enough verifiable data to be certain.

They aren't necessarily "lying" but what they are saying doesn't constitute actual proof unless they can show large numbers of patients under controlled circumstances.

What we have now is lots of anecdotes.
Click to expand...
I totally understand the academic argument. That just doesn't mesh with compassion and is hard to take with your heart.
 
Blacknarwhal

Blacknarwhal

Let's Go Brandon!
Zahra

Zahra

Veteran Member
I support Navarro's position about this. We need something that saves lives NOW, and while there might not be iron clad clinical trial tested proof that Hydroxychloroquine works, right now it's the best treatment option we appear to have, so if it could possibly save lives, I'd say use it.

You go to war with the army that you have.... and so far, that's the best we have.

We can all hope that there's a vaccine against getting Covid-19 eventually, but up until now at least there has never been a successful vaccine ever made for a human corona virus. SARS-1 came on the scene in 2003 -- to this day there is still no vaccine for it. Same goes for MERS.... so while we all hope that this time is different, instead of just waiting & hoping, I say we need something that gives the most serious cases a fighting chance NOW.
 
Blacknarwhal

Blacknarwhal

Let's Go Brandon!
Zahra said:
I support Navarro's position about this. We need something that saves lives NOW, and while there might not be iron clad clinical trial tested proof that Hydroxychloroquine works, right now it's the best treatment option we appear to have for now, so if it could possibly save lives, I'd say use it.

You go to war with the army that you have.... and so far, that's the best we have.

We can all hope that there's a vaccine against getting Covid-19 eventually, but up until now at least there has never been a successful vaccine ever made for a human corona virus. SARS-1 came on the scene in 2003 -- to this day there is still no vaccine for it. Same goes for MERS.... so while we all hope that this time is different, instead of just waiting & hoping, I say we need something that gives the most serious cases a fighting chance NOW.
Click to expand...

Sounds good to me!

We also need to get people back to work. Can't do much virus-fighting without a functioning economy.
 
EMICT

EMICT

Veteran Member
There are many a person walking the earth today due to providers administering meds with the 'doesn't hurt, might help' philosophy. Doesn't always work, but for the one's that it does... it is quite rewarding. Been there, done that a couple of memorable times during my career when the 'kitchen sink' approach worked... and for the naysayers, the person would have remained clinically 'dead' if I hadn't tried.
 
colonel holman

colonel holman

Veteran Member
Snyper said:
It is when trying to prove the efficacy of drug treatments.


The percentages claiming "success" are low.
There's not enough verifiable data to be certain.

They aren't necessarily "lying" but what they are saying doesn't constitute actual proof unless they can show large numbers of patients under controlled circumstances.

What we have now is lots of anecdotes.
Click to expand...

Correct.
Anecdotal evidence is usually contaminated by confirmation bias (i.e. hoping it works leads you to see the successes more brightly than your view of failures... plus a tendency to ignore control groups). What % got better with the meds? (89%?); but compare that to what % got better without the meds? (86%?). Is that a significant difference of a normal day-to-day fluctuation of trends? Note I made up those % numbers purely as an example... not actual data. BUT, if I or a loved one were sick, I would demand a shot at it.
 
Blacknarwhal

Blacknarwhal

Let's Go Brandon!
colonel holman said:
Correct.
Anecdotal evidence is usually contaminated by confirmation bias (i.e. hoping it works leads you to see the successes more brightly than your view of failures... plus a tendency to ignore control groups). What % got better with the meds? (89%?); but compare that to what % got better without the meds? (86%?). Is that a significant difference of a normal day-to-day fluctuation of trends? Note I made up those % numbers purely as an example... not actual data. BUT, if I or a loved one were sick, I would demand a shot at it.
Click to expand...

And, you know, I ain't a doctor, and no one will take my calls about playing one on TV. But when you start getting piles of anecdotal evidence, maybe it's time to start considering the pattern involved.
 
I

intothatgoodnight

. . .
WFK said:
This is not a game of statistics.
Click to expand...

Snyper said:
It is when trying to prove the efficacy of drug treatments.
Click to expand...

Time is of the essence, when treating a COVID-19 positive patient who is having breathing difficulties - whether hydroxychloroquine is clinically proven as effective against COVID-19, or not, is not a first line consideration in deciding to administer a hydroxychloroquine+azrithomycin+zinc therapy. Relieving the breathing trauma and ongoing damage caused by and active COVID-19 infection is of the utmost importance.

WFK said:
I think there are more doctors who claim such success. Are they lying?
Click to expand...

Snyper said:
The percentages claiming "success" are low.

There's not enough verifiable data to be certain.

They aren't necessarily "lying" but what they are saying doesn't constitute actual proof unless they can show large numbers of patients under controlled circumstances.

What we have now is lots of anecdotes.
Click to expand...

What is NOT antidotal is the good decade+ long human safety record of hydroxycholoquine, when used to treat malaria, lupus and arthritis. While there may be a certain few people who will have a negative reaction when taking hydroxychloroquine, few to none (statistically) have experienced permanent damage or death as a result of taking hydroxychloroquine.

As Trump, himself, noted during a presser Q&A - (paraphrasing here) "What do you have to lose in administering hydroxychloroquine to a suffering COVID-19 positive patient? If it works, it works - if it does not work, you tried."

Nothing gained, nothing lost.

A relative no-brainer, here, for any attending physician treating a COVID-19 positive patient.


intothegoodnight
 
Last edited:
ainitfunny

ainitfunny

Saved, to glorify God.
I cannot believe that nobody has commented on my post number 39 on page 1.
Am I overstating anything?

You would NOT be concerned by the fact that over half (51%) of American doctors believe NOTHING is the best medicine for patients, admitting in the Survey taken, that they would do NOTHING for incoming COVID-19 Hospital patients??

That means we have over a 50% chance you or I will just be imprisoned in a hospital till we die, alone, with nobody to help or care at all.

Doesn't anyone see that kind of treatment is explaining why they are going to have to DRAG patients out of their homes (where most would prefer to die if they have to die)

Obviously, because the public is not allowed into the hospitals to see this kind of treatment, but the word of it is being carried back to the public by those who witnessed it and survived COVID-19!

That may be the real reason why fewer people are coming to the hospitals, if they hear of this kind of treatment (like LAB RATS) and they suspect they won't be helped, but will only be watched, tested, measured and their symptoms recorded until they die.

Look on the chart below at the third line down "NOTHING" then follow it to US doctors response. Those doctors could have chosen anything from the list: pain relief or anti-anxiety drugs or other comfort, therapy, and relief or hopeful anti-viral medicines but they chose to give NOTHING to suffering patients!!! One might wonder if nothing means no food or water too?

They meant to prove something about the new medicine but accidentally revealed a much more shocking truth! By the way, did anyone else notice that the chart below is marked at the bottom left in teeny gray letters as "PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL?
MD SURVEY.png
 
Last edited:
Countrymouse

Countrymouse

Country exile in the city
Snyper said:
The "source" was some unnamed individual.
That's also part of the article.

It doesn't matter who published the story first.
If they can't name a source it has no credibility.

If you want to believe them, it makes no difference to me.

(Your "dude" apparently doesn't realize I stopped listening to him a long time ago) :)
Click to expand...


Then I guess per your rationale all of Watergate should never have happened.
 
homepark

homepark

Resist
I really don't think Bill and Melinda Gates need the money. Fauci is a trained physician. Sometimes it is what it is, people looking to make a positive difference. If I had a loved one with covid19, I would grant permission to try meds based on anecdotal information. That is because I know that if you end up in the hospital with covid19, the greater likelihood is that you will die from it and its complications. Fauci is not there to set policy. He is there to present a traditional medical view based on science, such as it is. I would like see the economy opened back up, with people held accountable for their using universal precautions, or not. I think it would be ok to refuse service to those not taking precautions. It is your business, and your life at stake.
 
FaithfulSkeptic

FaithfulSkeptic

Carrying the mantle of doubt
teneo said:
Proven science tends to lag anecdotal evidence by necessity, so when time is critical and people are dying you go with what you’ve got. Fauci won’t make a formal recommendation until he has 2 years of studies to back him up.
Click to expand...
Maybe that's because of the precedence set by tort lawyers in this country.
 
kyrsyan

kyrsyan

Has No Life - Lives on TB
Blacknarwhal said:
And, you know, I ain't a doctor, and no one will take my calls about playing one on TV. But when you start getting piles of anecdotal evidence, maybe it's time to start considering the pattern involved.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but anti-vaccine and disability parents have been saying that for at least 3 decades. Seriously. It's enough to make your head spin. But hey, since this affects a large portion of the population, maybe they will listen.
 
DryCreek

DryCreek

Veteran Member
homepark said:
I really don't think Bill and Melinda Gates need the money.
Click to expand...
That is a valid point, but you have to go beyond self-enrichment as a goal. The ultra-rich don't approach every project as a money maker. No, some projects are launched to advance their idealistic goals instead. If a very wealthy person believes that the only way to save the earth is by cutting the population by X amount, and they have the resources to make that happen - then they're going to march down that path. They feel that their superior wealth gives them insight the hoi-polloi just will never attain. They are rich - so they must be smarter than the 99% of earths inhabitants who are not.

At the same time they are working their agenda to reduce population, they console themselves by knowing that although it's quite painful for humanity, they're the only ones doing the right thing. Of course, they'll make sure that they survive so that they can witness the wonders they've wrought. It kinda' reminds me a superhero movie - where the bad guy can reduce the population of the universe merely by snapping his fingers. He carries such a burden, since he has to kill so many good people (including his adopted daughter), but deep in his heart he knows it's the only proper thing to do.
 
I

intothatgoodnight

. . .
DryCreek said:
That is a valid point, but you have to go beyond self-enrichment as a goal. The ultra-rich don't approach every project as a money maker. No, some projects are launched to advance their idealistic goals instead. If a very wealthy person believes that the only way to save the earth is by cutting the population by X amount, and they have the resources to make that happen - then they're going to march down that path. They feel that their superior wealth gives them insight the hoi-polloi just will never attain. They are rich - so they must be smarter than the 99% of earths inhabitants who are not.

At the same time they are working their agenda to reduce population, they console themselves by knowing that although it's quite painful for humanity, they're the only ones doing the right thing. Of course, they'll make sure that they survive so that they can witness the wonders they've wrought. It kinda' reminds me a superhero movie - where the bad guy can reduce the population of the universe merely by snapping his fingers. He carries such a burden, since he has to kill so many good people (including his adopted daughter), but deep in his heart he knows it's the only proper thing to do.
Click to expand...
Good reply. Clear and concise explanation of how some extremely wealthy folks view themselves - have similar understandings from up-close-and-personal experiences that played out, at one time, in a past professional life.


intothegoodnight
 
I

intothatgoodnight

. . .
Snyper said:
There was documentation and physical evidence to support that event.

This is all hearsay.
Click to expand...
How many different and creative ways might you be able to conjure up in telling us that you don't believe in the use of hydroxychloroquine as an alternative treatment protocol for COVID-19 positive patients? I've lost count.

Anything positive to add to this discussion, or are you simply interested in continuing to urinate in the shared community pool?


intothegoodnight
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top