4 ms·

How did they turn it into a partisan issue? Trump announced in a press conference that hydroxychoroquine held promise as a potential therapy based on anecdotal

How did they turn it into a partisan issue? Trump announced in a press conference that hydroxychoroquine held promise as a potential therapy based on anecdotal evidence being shared by physicians in Asia and Europe. Everyone, Democrats, the media, and individuals jumped on him as promoting snake oil and having no basis for his claims. It was barely news when he announced it. Some of the same evidence he was referencing in his claims had been circulating in preprints and on subs like r/COVID19 for weeks at that point. I strongly dislike the administration generally, but I've been perplexed as to how eager everyone has been to attack him over this particular incident. And if it was made partisan, it seems like it was done so by others, and not the administration itself.

Justsignedup 7y ago
He heard something about these two drugs, and without any scientific evidence he announced it, causing a panic-grab for the drugs. Unfortunately even the CDC was saying we don't have evidence supporting it.
- airstrike 7y ago
  That's valid criticism, but it has nothing to do with partisanship.
  - MiroF 7y ago
    The President shouldn't be recommending unproven drugs, he should be communicating what we know and what to do now.
    - airstrike 7y ago
      That's still not a partisan issue.
      - MiroF 7y ago
        Then criticizing the President for promoting drugs that haven't been shown to work is non-partisan as well. Can't have it both ways. I find the "political" vs "non-political" distinction facile anyways.
    - jeffdavis 7y ago
      But the president is not just a mouthpiece, he needs to make decisions based on incomplete information. His administration seems to have opened up channels for trials and off-label usage.
      - MiroF 7y ago
        > off-label usage Off-label usage is bad when this is a drug that other people (like those with lupus - see here [0]) need to survive - we need trials first and I'm not sure that is occurring due to the President. This is a problem created by too early messaging when you should be focusing on "stay home" and other clear communication that was absent for weeks before his focus on this drug. [0]: https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/31/opinions/hydroxychloroquine-covid-19-and-lupus-fear-martin/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/31/opinions/hydroxychloroquine-c...
        jeffdavis 7y ago
        It seems like this thread has evolved from (1) the president was partisan in his statements about HCQ; (2) the president was political in his statements about HCQ; to (3) he jumped the gun on messaging. Let's not let the media tear us apart. Not everything is Trump's fault. Not everything is America's fault. And sometimes people who are not Trump or countries that are not America make bad decisions that cost lives. Let's acknowledge these basic facts and work together. California and Texas seem to be making better choices than NY and Florida. America seems to be doing better than Italy and Spain but worse than Germany. It's not really a partisan thing and it's not really a national identity thing. It's an issue of who in what regions acted strongly enough, and when. America is a federal system, so we would expect variance between the states, and that's what we're seeing. Same as in Europe. The federal government plays an important role (like preventing test kits from being developed outside the CDC -- bad -- and early travel restrictions -- probably good), but not the only role, and it shows.
- DubiousPusher 7y ago
  Yeah, I think it's not quite correct to say he made it partisan but he absolutely politicised the science here.
- phkahler 7y ago
  >> He heard something about these two drugs, and without any scientific evidence he announced it, causing a panic-grab for the drugs. Unfortunately even the CDC was saying we don't have evidence supporting it. He simply reported that it looked promising in early studies, like we had already seen reported here on HN. His other action was apparently to lean the FDA to find out ASAP rather than heming and hawing for years following standard beaurocratic protocols. I think it was fine to do both those things. Responsible even.
  - dlp211 7y ago
    I can't believe I have to say this, but the POTUS is not some hacker news comment. What they say has large and far reaching consequences and they shouldn't be spouting off about anecdotal evidence. Their comments had already caused a shortage of HCQ, and led to at least one death.
    - bart_spoon 7y ago
      > Their comments had already caused a shortage of HCQ HCQ can only be obtained via a doctor's prescription. If there is a shortage of HCQ, its because actual physicians are writing it more, either for their own benefit or for their patients. This isn't the average person panic buying toilet paper. Its trained medical professionals. If you are implying that they are incapably of thinking rationally and professionally in response to a short, offhanded comment by the President, then the issue is far graver than anything Trump is saying. > led to at least one death Which occured because an elderly couple saw the news, realized that HCQ is in a chemical used to treat their fish tank, drank it, and one of them died. If I read an article saying a drinking alcohol in moderation can reduce heart disease, and in response I go out and chug a bottle of isopropyl alcohol, the consequences wouldn't be blamed on anyone but myself. If anything, it supports the idea that any partisanship in this situation is coming from those who are trying to pin every instance of something bad occurring, literally at the level of a single idiotic individual, on the POTUS.
    - phkahler 7y ago
      >> I can't believe I have to say this, but the POTUS is not some hacker news comment. No, hes a guy charged with making high level decisions in a crisis. He also has some very competent advisors at places like the NIH, FDA, CDC etc... I dont think he was just some redneck responding to a tabloid article. If the doctor now publicly claiming 699 treatments with 0 deaths using HCQ turns out to be a blatant fraud I think he may well lose his license given the situation. But yeah, let's fuck around and try nothing and see how that goes.
- bart_spoon 7y ago
  > He heard something about these two drugs, and without any scientific evidence he announced it, causing a panic-grab for the drugs. And? As I said, there has been some anecdotal evidence coming from countries like China, SK, and France indicating it could help. It shouldn't be a strike against a government official for sharing potentially important information. At a certain point we need to stop blaming people in positions of authority for the stupidity that exists among individuals in society. I'd rather my government be open and transparent than hide information from me because the more idiotic portions of the population may react poorly. Its also worth noting that Hydroxychloroquine is unavailable in the US without a prescription. The "panic-grab" you are seeing is entirely due to physicians buying for themselves and their family/friends. Definitely sleazy, but they are hardly uninformed. > Unfortunately even the CDC was saying we don't have evidence supporting it. The CDC has proven itself to be conservative and slow to the point of harmful ineptitude. A huge part of the reason the situation in the US has diverged so much from countries that have managed to successfully clamp down on the disease (like SK) is because they insisted that testing rely on their own, overengineered procedures, and because they've insisted (for at least a decade now) that masks are only beneficial for HCPs, despite numerous studies to the contrary and the advice of nations like those in East Asia. Now, after the cat is well out of the bag, they've opened up testing to private companies and other testing procedures, and are now beginning to say that regular people should in fact be using masks to prevent the spread of the disease. An appeal to authority is a fallacy on the best of days. Its even worse when said authority is in the midst of the most incompetent moment in its history.
  - BFatts 7y ago
    "And?..." Seriously? If there's panic buying (or prescribing, as did occur) then supplies are diminished if not depleted. WHAT GOOD IS THAT?
    - bart_spoon 7y ago
      As I said, the only people prescribing this stuff are actual physicians. You are assuming that a trained MD is going to start prescribing this stuff willy-nilly based on two sentences by the president? If that actually occurs, it's because they agree with him and are prescribing them as they see fit. There isn't "panic" in the equation. Its physicians trying to help their patients.
cvwright 7y ago
Welcome to the club. The over-the-top reactions to events like this are what's going to get this guy re-elected.
BFatts 7y ago
The difference is that Trump likes to promote himself in any way he can. So he hitched his wagon to CQ and HCQ before their true efficacy was known AND promoted it as a miracle cure before that was actually known. He later tempered his speech with "shows a lot of promise" but his initial statements basically said "if you can get your hands on it - you should get on it ASAP" which is irresponsible of the POTUS. He's not a medical expert, but he loves knowing things and regurgitating them to sound smart. He wanted people (in case it panned out to be good) to attach his name to CQ and HCQ. That is selfish.

Justsignedup 7y ago

He heard something about these two drugs, and without any scientific evidence he announced it, causing a panic-grab for the drugs. Unfortunately even the CDC was saying we don't have evidence supporting it.

airstrike 7y ago
That's valid criticism, but it has nothing to do with partisanship.
- MiroF 7y ago
  The President shouldn't be recommending unproven drugs, he should be communicating what we know and what to do now.
  - airstrike 7y ago
    That's still not a partisan issue.
    - MiroF 7y ago
      Then criticizing the President for promoting drugs that haven't been shown to work is non-partisan as well. Can't have it both ways. I find the "political" vs "non-political" distinction facile anyways.
  - jeffdavis 7y ago
    But the president is not just a mouthpiece, he needs to make decisions based on incomplete information. His administration seems to have opened up channels for trials and off-label usage.
    - MiroF 7y ago
      > off-label usage Off-label usage is bad when this is a drug that other people (like those with lupus - see here [0]) need to survive - we need trials first and I'm not sure that is occurring due to the President. This is a problem created by too early messaging when you should be focusing on "stay home" and other clear communication that was absent for weeks before his focus on this drug. [0]: https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/31/opinions/hydroxychloroquine-covid-19-and-lupus-fear-martin/index.html https://www.cnn.com/2020/03/31/opinions/hydroxychloroquine-c...
      - jeffdavis 7y ago
        It seems like this thread has evolved from (1) the president was partisan in his statements about HCQ; (2) the president was political in his statements about HCQ; to (3) he jumped the gun on messaging. Let's not let the media tear us apart. Not everything is Trump's fault. Not everything is America's fault. And sometimes people who are not Trump or countries that are not America make bad decisions that cost lives. Let's acknowledge these basic facts and work together. California and Texas seem to be making better choices than NY and Florida. America seems to be doing better than Italy and Spain but worse than Germany. It's not really a partisan thing and it's not really a national identity thing. It's an issue of who in what regions acted strongly enough, and when. America is a federal system, so we would expect variance between the states, and that's what we're seeing. Same as in Europe. The federal government plays an important role (like preventing test kits from being developed outside the CDC -- bad -- and early travel restrictions -- probably good), but not the only role, and it shows.
DubiousPusher 7y ago
Yeah, I think it's not quite correct to say he made it partisan but he absolutely politicised the science here.
phkahler 7y ago
>> He heard something about these two drugs, and without any scientific evidence he announced it, causing a panic-grab for the drugs. Unfortunately even the CDC was saying we don't have evidence supporting it. He simply reported that it looked promising in early studies, like we had already seen reported here on HN. His other action was apparently to lean the FDA to find out ASAP rather than heming and hawing for years following standard beaurocratic protocols. I think it was fine to do both those things. Responsible even.
- dlp211 7y ago
  I can't believe I have to say this, but the POTUS is not some hacker news comment. What they say has large and far reaching consequences and they shouldn't be spouting off about anecdotal evidence. Their comments had already caused a shortage of HCQ, and led to at least one death.
  - bart_spoon 7y ago
    > Their comments had already caused a shortage of HCQ HCQ can only be obtained via a doctor's prescription. If there is a shortage of HCQ, its because actual physicians are writing it more, either for their own benefit or for their patients. This isn't the average person panic buying toilet paper. Its trained medical professionals. If you are implying that they are incapably of thinking rationally and professionally in response to a short, offhanded comment by the President, then the issue is far graver than anything Trump is saying. > led to at least one death Which occured because an elderly couple saw the news, realized that HCQ is in a chemical used to treat their fish tank, drank it, and one of them died. If I read an article saying a drinking alcohol in moderation can reduce heart disease, and in response I go out and chug a bottle of isopropyl alcohol, the consequences wouldn't be blamed on anyone but myself. If anything, it supports the idea that any partisanship in this situation is coming from those who are trying to pin every instance of something bad occurring, literally at the level of a single idiotic individual, on the POTUS.
  - phkahler 7y ago
    >> I can't believe I have to say this, but the POTUS is not some hacker news comment. No, hes a guy charged with making high level decisions in a crisis. He also has some very competent advisors at places like the NIH, FDA, CDC etc... I dont think he was just some redneck responding to a tabloid article. If the doctor now publicly claiming 699 treatments with 0 deaths using HCQ turns out to be a blatant fraud I think he may well lose his license given the situation. But yeah, let's fuck around and try nothing and see how that goes.
bart_spoon 7y ago
> He heard something about these two drugs, and without any scientific evidence he announced it, causing a panic-grab for the drugs. And? As I said, there has been some anecdotal evidence coming from countries like China, SK, and France indicating it could help. It shouldn't be a strike against a government official for sharing potentially important information. At a certain point we need to stop blaming people in positions of authority for the stupidity that exists among individuals in society. I'd rather my government be open and transparent than hide information from me because the more idiotic portions of the population may react poorly. Its also worth noting that Hydroxychloroquine is unavailable in the US without a prescription. The "panic-grab" you are seeing is entirely due to physicians buying for themselves and their family/friends. Definitely sleazy, but they are hardly uninformed. > Unfortunately even the CDC was saying we don't have evidence supporting it. The CDC has proven itself to be conservative and slow to the point of harmful ineptitude. A huge part of the reason the situation in the US has diverged so much from countries that have managed to successfully clamp down on the disease (like SK) is because they insisted that testing rely on their own, overengineered procedures, and because they've insisted (for at least a decade now) that masks are only beneficial for HCPs, despite numerous studies to the contrary and the advice of nations like those in East Asia. Now, after the cat is well out of the bag, they've opened up testing to private companies and other testing procedures, and are now beginning to say that regular people should in fact be using masks to prevent the spread of the disease. An appeal to authority is a fallacy on the best of days. Its even worse when said authority is in the midst of the most incompetent moment in its history.
- BFatts 7y ago
  "And?..." Seriously? If there's panic buying (or prescribing, as did occur) then supplies are diminished if not depleted. WHAT GOOD IS THAT?
  - bart_spoon 7y ago
    As I said, the only people prescribing this stuff are actual physicians. You are assuming that a trained MD is going to start prescribing this stuff willy-nilly based on two sentences by the president? If that actually occurs, it's because they agree with him and are prescribing them as they see fit. There isn't "panic" in the equation. Its physicians trying to help their patients.

cvwright 7y ago

Welcome to the club. The over-the-top reactions to events like this are what's going to get this guy re-elected.

BFatts 7y ago

The difference is that Trump likes to promote himself in any way he can. So he hitched his wagon to CQ and HCQ before their true efficacy was known AND promoted it as a miracle cure before that was actually known. He later tempered his speech with "shows a lot of promise" but his initial statements basically said "if you can get your hands on it - you should get on it ASAP" which is irresponsible of the POTUS. He's not a medical expert, but he loves knowing things and regurgitating them to sound smart. He wanted people (in case it panned out to be good) to attach his name to CQ and HCQ. That is selfish.