3 ms·
>This is as professional as a certain former US president suggesting we should shine strong light into the body or inject people's lungs with disinfectant. It's
by adamiscool8 3y ago
>This is as professional as a certain former US president suggesting we should shine strong light into the body or inject people's lungs with disinfectant. It's not a "hypothesis" it's just you being stupid.
Ultraviolet light treatments introduced into the tracheas of five critically ill COVID-19 patients appeared to be safe and associated with a reduction in the respiratory load of SARS-CoV-2—the virus responsible for COVID-19—in all but one patient, according to a study conducted by Cedars-Sinai. [0]
Maybe people should be trying wild stuff on themselves. Granted they shouldn't make sweeping recommendations from it. But moving fast and breaking things solves more problems than waiting for scientific consensus. Planck's Principle and all that.
[0] https://www.cedars-sinai.org/newsroom/reduced-viral-loads-seen-in-covid-19-patients-treated-with-uva-light/ https://www.cedars-sinai.org/newsroom/reduced-viral-loads-se...
- Jamesbeam 3y agoThe study says in no way that the uva therapy was responsible for better outcome of the patients. 20% of their study group died while under the treatment, not necessarily from it. You make all the classic mistakes misinterpreting study results. They suspect that some kind of protein activation from the light could have lowered the viral load. They don’t have proof for that or claim they have. This is in no way an accepted or used treatment for critical ill Covid-19 patients. But you suggest we should move fast and break things. Breaking things in this case means killing real people.
- adamiscool8 3y agoIt has potential. No one should be forced to try things, but if people make an informed choice to become test subjects it’s not something to discourage.