Jump to content
BANGKOK
rooster59

Drug touted by Trump to treat COVID-19 linked to higher death risk - study

Recommended Posts

9 hours ago, rabas said:

Back to your BBC article. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-52779309

 

1. "The president has repeatedly promoted the drug, against medical advice."

 

I am unaware (but don't follow closely) that Trump is telling people to go out and take chloroquine. They can't anyway, it's a prescription drug. As for medical views, I have shown a few times that the general medical view was quite positive at the time he made his first comment. The BBC also badly blurs the line between saying something has potential and saying it is recommended for patients. So, the BBC's 10 word statement is materially wrong on a few counts. It is an ungrounded overly simplified hit piece, It is not accurate news.

 

2. The BBC does not provide any reference to the study and does not even explain what kind of study it was so readers have no way to know. Luckily I had already read it. They BBC only cheery picks.

 

  • It was not a medical trial, it was an statical analysis based on a global database of hospital records. A  hodgepodge of different patients under different treatments and circumstances. The authors had no control over how treatments were done or evaluated.
  • The study is not wrong considering, but there are issues that should be reported, which are not. Chloroquine and other experimental drugs are often given to more severely ill patients, which can easily bias outcome.  Second, they did not include zinc. It has been known as fact for 10+ years that zinc is what attacks the virus. Chloroquine only helps zinc enter cells.
  • The study showed HydroxCQ was somewhat more dangerous than chloroquine. This makes no sense because HCQ is often used because is is safer. This indicates the study has very wider error margins.

So the BBC is using the negative results without explaining them.

 

Then the BBC says "Mr Trump said he was taking the drug despite public health officials warning that it could cause heart problems." Really?  He is surrounded by top medical experts and doctors. Does it cause heart problems as a prophylactic? Did the BBC consider any of that, or just ram negative points together? Did the BBC also tell you there are 218 medical trials involving chloroquine? No. Just negative stuff.

 

So the BBC has presented only a negative side based on poorly interpreted or ignored information,  along with a big picture of Mr. Trump and a basic lie under the picture. They are leading you.

 

The good news? BBC is 100X better than the likes of CNN.

 

I agree with all of that. I would only like to add a comment on "against medical advice" and as WHOSE medical advice? Opinions vary.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11707597/brit-scientists-develop-coronavirus-inhaler-fight-disease-symptoms/

 

COVID KILLER

Brit scientists develop coronavirus inhaler which could fight disease at first sign of symptoms

  • 26 May 2020, 0:33
  • Updated: 26 May 2020, 7:42
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 3NUMBAS said:

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/11707597/brit-scientists-develop-coronavirus-inhaler-fight-disease-symptoms/

 

COVID KILLER

Brit scientists develop coronavirus inhaler which could fight disease at first sign of symptoms

  • 26 May 2020, 0:33
  • Updated: 26 May 2020, 7:42

I have no doubt someone will claim that Trump was right to suggest to spread disinfectant in patients' lungs

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to love how politically neutral TVF is where Trump is concerned. The very headline presupposes the mob response, which is hardly based on science. Maybe there is a deal in the future making betwixt TVF and CNN? Whose news is going to be the faker?

 

 

  • Like 2
  • Confused 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Jingthing said:

The headline factually represents the facts based news story. Nothing fake about it. Just because some people might not like the facts in a news story does not make it fake.

Factually represents. Ha. Somehow I doubt you'd feel the same way if the headline were coming from Fox News. Hypocrite.

  • Confused 1
  • Sad 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, OZinPattaya said:

Factually represents. Ha. Somehow I doubt you'd feel the same way if the headline were coming from Fox News. Hypocrite.

Name calling, huh? Stay classy. Goodbye.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Name calling, huh? Stay classy. Goodbye.

Jingthing. Who, exactly, is indulging in the name-calling? I'd encourage you to examine the TVF Archives in this respect 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/25/2020 at 12:48 AM, Crazy Alex said:

I agree with all of that. I would only like to add a comment on "against medical advice" and as WHOSE medical advice? Opinions vary.

Obviously the medical advice they agree with. As long as it's against Trump they certainly like it.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OZinPattaya said:

Jingthing. Who, exactly, is indulging in the name-calling? I'd encourage you to examine the TVF Archives in this respect 

He gives up debating very easily.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, OZinPattaya said:

And now that it seems there's some credibility to this notion, instead of giving credit where credit is due you instead use it as yet another spurious reason to defame a president that you're already going to defame in the first place.

So you are suggesting that he should get some credit for it. I did not expect my prediction to be confirmed so quickly. 😊

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jingthing said:

The headline factually represents the facts based news story. Nothing fake about it. Just because some people might not like the facts in a news story does not make it fake.

Please read his post carefully. He didn't say the story was fake. He asked who was going to be the new faker. Facts matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

By differing accounts Trump has cried wolf 15,000-18,000 times during his presidency. By this time the press may reflexively assume everything he says is incorrect. Who could blame them? The record clearly shows he is a pathological liar bending truth to fit his own self serving version of reality. 

Unfortunately the press is so polarized in their opinions and views it is impossible for most to be objective anymore. 

I think Trump is P.T. Barnum incarnate. It is almost impossible to separate the wheat from the chaff in his remarks. The press pouncing on Trump about taking Hydroxycholoroquine is not worthy of credible journalism. I took the drug as does everyone in West Africa or any place malaria is present. It is a simple choice- take the drug or get malaria. That the press can malign a drug that has been around 65+ years is unconscionable. Sure if you take it indiscriminately it can cause damage. You can also die from taking too much Tylenol. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Onrai said:

By differing accounts Trump has cried wolf 15,000-18,000 times during his presidency. By this time the press may reflexively assume everything he says is incorrect. Who could blame them? The record clearly shows he is a pathological liar bending truth to fit his own self serving version of reality. 

Unfortunately the press is so polarized in their opinions and views it is impossible for most to be objective anymore. 

I think Trump is P.T. Barnum incarnate. It is almost impossible to separate the wheat from the chaff in his remarks. The press pouncing on Trump about taking Hydroxycholoroquine is not worthy of credible journalism. I took the drug as does everyone in West Africa or any place malaria is present. It is a simple choice- take the drug or get malaria. That the press can malign a drug that has been around 65+ years is unconscionable. Sure if you take it indiscriminately it can cause damage. You can also die from taking too much Tylenol. 

'It is a simple choice- take the drug or get malaria.'

Not quite that simple.

Decades ago I went on holiday from the UK to Malaysia and Singapore. One of the drugs I was prescribed to prevent malaria was Hydroxycholoroquine,

I still contracted malaria, so although it vastly reduces the chance, it's not 100% successful.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...