Why is DJT so obsessed with pushing hydroxychloroquine?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I applaud the efforts to test cheap generic drugs with long histories of usage and safety for effectiveness against Covid-19. These include hydroxycholoriquine, colchicine, and BCG vaccinations, all of which cost pennies to produce.

This disease is reaching many emerging market countries for which promising drugs like remdesivir are simply out of reach from a cost perspective.

For this reason alone, I cannot understand why people are so eager to pour cold water on efforts to investigate these older generic drugs. Remdesivir and plasma treatments are great but they are luxuries reserved for rich countries.

Because Trump said something favorable about it.

It’s really just that simple, unfortunately. He says “yes”, they immediately say “no”. He says hot, they say cold. He says low, they say high.

Total binary unthinking.

Nobody threw cold water on research!!! it’s the opposite - we’re saying we won’t know until the research is completed.

Don’t bother. We’ve explained this 1000 times and they just don’t get it.

They are dumb as a stump. Probably snorting aquarium chemicals too.

[Anonymous]

Ivermectin is promising also

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I applaud the efforts to test cheap generic drugs with long histories of usage and safety for effectiveness against Covid-19. These include hydroxycholoriquine, colchicine, and BCG vaccinations, all of which cost pennies to produce.

This disease is reaching many emerging market countries for which promising drugs like remdesivir are simply out of reach from a cost perspective.

For this reason alone, I cannot understand why people are so eager to pour cold water on efforts to investigate these older generic drugs. Remdesivir and plasma treatments are great but they are luxuries reserved for rich countries.

Because Trump said something favorable about it.

It’s really just that simple, unfortunately. He says “yes”, they immediately say “no”. He says hot, they say cold. He says low, they say high.

Total binary unthinking.

That simple and very sad. Letting their hate blind them.

So let’s use a neutral source. What did Fauci say about it?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I applaud the efforts to test cheap generic drugs with long histories of usage and safety for effectiveness against Covid-19. These include hydroxycholoriquine, colchicine, and BCG vaccinations, all of which cost pennies to produce.

This disease is reaching many emerging market countries for which promising drugs like remdesivir are simply out of reach from a cost perspective.

For this reason alone, I cannot understand why people are so eager to pour cold water on efforts to investigate these older generic drugs. Remdesivir and plasma treatments are great but they are luxuries reserved for rich countries.

Because Trump said something favorable about it.

It’s really just that simple, unfortunately. He says “yes”, they immediately say “no”. He says hot, they say cold. He says low, they say high.

Total binary unthinking.

That simple and very sad. Letting their hate blind them.

So let’s use a neutral source. What did Fauci say about it?

Mmmhmmm

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2020/03/20/fauci-love-letters-to-hillary-clinton-surfaces/

[Anonymous]

Fauci said we don’t know... but you can tell he’s not optimistic about it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Fauci said we don’t know... but you can tell he’s not optimistic about it.

Most drug candidates fail — hydroxychloroquine has failed several times before. It seems reasonable to be optimistic we’ll find something, but it’s foolish to be optimistic about any drug in particular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Ivermectin is promising also

Yes, this is the medication I was speaking of earlier in the Australian study. So far the test just examined the effects in-vitro, but there’s no reason to suspect results would be markedly different within the body. Again, the mechanism at work seems to be that viral replication is inhibited, much as with the quinines. Ivermectin is well understood and widely used in both domestic animals and humans. It is one of the UN’s essential medications. It’s used to treat millions of people annually in the tropics and developing countries to treat a wide spectrum of parasitic infections and larval infestations. As with the quinines, there is no mystery with regards to dosesges or side effects, because it’s been used for decades. I would hope that it is being used in initial treatments right now. It can’t hurt anything to try it. All evidence right now is anecdotal, because these aren’t traditional studies. But anecdotal evidence is still evidence. It’s compelling to me as a chemist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ivermectin is promising also

Yes, this is the medication I was speaking of earlier in the Australian study. So far the test just examined the effects in-vitro, but there’s no reason to suspect results would be markedly different within the body. Again, the mechanism at work seems to be that viral replication is inhibited, much as with the quinines. Ivermectin is well understood and widely used in both domestic animals and humans. It is one of the UN’s essential medications. It’s used to treat millions of people annually in the tropics and developing countries to treat a wide spectrum of parasitic infections and larval infestations. As with the quinines, there is no mystery with regards to dosesges or side effects, because it’s been used for decades. I would hope that it is being used in initial treatments right now. It can’t hurt anything to try it. All evidence right now is anecdotal, because these aren’t traditional studies. But anecdotal evidence is still evidence. It’s compelling to me as a chemist.

Another cheap generic drug with a long history of usage and safety. I hope at least one of the low cost solutions proves effective.

[Anonymous]

Donald Trump has not talked about hydroxychloroquine in the past week, and the true believers in the drug on my Facebook pages are worried that he might be abandoning his promotion of the drug. (Some say that the deep state has gotten to Trump to stop him from talking about it.)

Of course, Trump would never publicly admit that he made a mistake or has changed his mind. And he will deny ever having promoting it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I applaud the efforts to test cheap generic drugs with long histories of usage and safety for effectiveness against Covid-19. These include hydroxycholoriquine, colchicine, and BCG vaccinations, all of which cost pennies to produce.

This disease is reaching many emerging market countries for which promising drugs like remdesivir are simply out of reach from a cost perspective.

For this reason alone, I cannot understand why people are so eager to pour cold water on efforts to investigate these older generic drugs. Remdesivir and plasma treatments are great but they are luxuries reserved for rich countries.

Because Trump said something favorable about it.

It’s really just that simple, unfortunately. He says “yes”, they immediately say “no”. He says hot, they say cold. He says low, they say high.

Total binary unthinking.

That simple and very sad. Letting their hate blind them.

So let’s use a neutral source. What did Fauci say about it?

CDC quietly changes advice on malaria drug as Trump pushes it as a coronavirus cure

https://news.yahoo.com/cdc-quietly-changes-advice-malaria-005500386.html

The US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention removed dosage guidance from its website for a pair of antimalarial drugs President Donald Trump has been pushing as effective treatments for coronavirus.

The move comes three days after Reuters reported the CDC added the dosing information to its website after Mr Trump had pressed for the drugs - hydroxychloroquine and chrloroquine - to be more widely offered for use in treating the virus.

Dr Anthony Fauci, the government's top infectious disease doctor - has cautioned against rushing in to use the drug without proper testing.

"I think we've got to be careful that we don't make that majestic leap to assume that this is a knockout drug," he told Fox News. "We still need to do the kinds of studies that definitively prove whether any intervention, not just this one, any intervention is truly safe and effective."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want a bunch of dum dum’s running around, not practicing good hygiene, not social distancing, not wearing masks, because Trump told them there is a cure...

There is a trial right now testing Hydroxychloroquine in early stages. I really hope that we learn it works. It would be wonderful to get your easily accessible and rapid result Covid 19 test, and you are handed a simple drug or two and that’s that.
But what Trump is pushing is potentially false hope and at worst encouraging dangerous behavior.

It’s not false hope. It works for most patients. The mechanism for how it works is even understood. This isn’t witchcraft, ok? This is science.

Source?

If it works for most patients then why are 21000 Americans dead?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ivermectin is promising also

Yes, this is the medication I was speaking of earlier in the Australian study. So far the test just examined the effects in-vitro, but there’s no reason to suspect results would be markedly different within the body. Again, the mechanism at work seems to be that viral replication is inhibited, much as with the quinines. Ivermectin is well understood and widely used in both domestic animals and humans. It is one of the UN’s essential medications. It’s used to treat millions of people annually in the tropics and developing countries to treat a wide spectrum of parasitic infections and larval infestations. As with the quinines, there is no mystery with regards to dosesges or side effects, because it’s been used for decades. I would hope that it is being used in initial treatments right now. It can’t hurt anything to try it. All evidence right now is anecdotal, because these aren’t traditional studies. But anecdotal evidence is still evidence. It’s compelling to me as a chemist.

Another cheap generic drug with a long history of usage and safety. I hope at least one of the low cost solutions proves effective.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want a bunch of dum dum’s running around, not practicing good hygiene, not social distancing, not wearing masks, because Trump told them there is a cure...

There is a trial right now testing Hydroxychloroquine in early stages. I really hope that we learn it works. It would be wonderful to get your easily accessible and rapid result Covid 19 test, and you are handed a simple drug or two and that’s that.
But what Trump is pushing is potentially false hope and at worst encouraging dangerous behavior.

It’s not false hope. It works for most patients. The mechanism for how it works is even understood. This isn’t witchcraft, ok? This is science.

Source?

If it works for most patients then why are 21000 Americans dead?

Unlikely any of these dead received HCQ right after they were diagnosed. If they received it at all it would have been after they were hospitalized at which point, most agree, one is past the optimal time to administer.

A number of states allow HCQ only for hospitalized patients.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want a bunch of dum dum’s running around, not practicing good hygiene, not social distancing, not wearing masks, because Trump told them there is a cure...

There is a trial right now testing Hydroxychloroquine in early stages. I really hope that we learn it works. It would be wonderful to get your easily accessible and rapid result Covid 19 test, and you are handed a simple drug or two and that’s that.
But what Trump is pushing is potentially false hope and at worst encouraging dangerous behavior.

It’s not false hope. It works for most patients. The mechanism for how it works is even understood. This isn’t witchcraft, ok? This is science.

Source?

If it works for most patients then why are 21000 Americans dead?

Unlikely any of these dead received HCQ right after they were diagnosed. If they received it at all it would have been after they were hospitalized at which point, most agree, one is past the optimal time to administer.

A number of states allow HCQ only for hospitalized patients.

Source?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want a bunch of dum dum’s running around, not practicing good hygiene, not social distancing, not wearing masks, because Trump told them there is a cure...

There is a trial right now testing Hydroxychloroquine in early stages. I really hope that we learn it works. It would be wonderful to get your easily accessible and rapid result Covid 19 test, and you are handed a simple drug or two and that’s that.
But what Trump is pushing is potentially false hope and at worst encouraging dangerous behavior.

It’s not false hope. It works for most patients. The mechanism for how it works is even understood. This isn’t witchcraft, ok? This is science.

Source?

If it works for most patients then why are 21000 Americans dead?

Unlikely any of these dead received HCQ right after they were diagnosed. If they received it at all it would have been after they were hospitalized at which point, most agree, one is past the optimal time to administer.

A number of states allow HCQ only for hospitalized patients.

Source?

Upthread Michigan is mentioned.