9 ms·

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 s

by 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.
- zimpenfish 7y ago
  > If the doctor now publicly claiming 699 treatments with 0 deaths using HCQ turns out to be a blatant fraud The odds seem good on that one. "Zelenko’s claims, however, rest solely on taking him at his word: He has published no data, described no study design, and reported no analysis."
- dlp211 7y ago
  No one is saying try nothing. That is a bad faith argument. He is also incredibly poor at making good use those experts at the NIH, FDA, CDC, etc and and even poorer communicator of what those experts have to say.
frank2 7y ago
>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. I don't think the boards of medical quality assurance of the 50 states care enough about public statements to yank the license of (or even to discipline) a doctor for making a public statement the doctor knew to be false. In general the US medical profession doesn't have the commit to truth that, e.g., physicists do.
- phkahler 7y ago
  No, but in a case like this our current POTUS might. Not right, but he might.

by dlp211 7y ago

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.

zimpenfish 7y ago
> If the doctor now publicly claiming 699 treatments with 0 deaths using HCQ turns out to be a blatant fraud The odds seem good on that one. "Zelenko’s claims, however, rest solely on taking him at his word: He has published no data, described no study design, and reported no analysis."
dlp211 7y ago
No one is saying try nothing. That is a bad faith argument. He is also incredibly poor at making good use those experts at the NIH, FDA, CDC, etc and and even poorer communicator of what those experts have to say.

frank2 7y ago

>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. I don't think the boards of medical quality assurance of the 50 states care enough about public statements to yank the license of (or even to discipline) a doctor for making a public statement the doctor knew to be false. In general the US medical profession doesn't have the commit to truth that, e.g., physicists do.

phkahler 7y ago
No, but in a case like this our current POTUS might. Not right, but he might.