Corona Virus

[LinvilleGorge]

10 minutes ago, stirs said:

https://video.foxnews.com/v/6147715065001#sp=show-clips

In all fairness, Dr. Oz has never shied away from quackery.

I think there's enough evidence out there that there is likely something to the benefit of this drug for treating COVID-19, but Dr. Oz stumping for it doesn't do anything for me.

[stirs]

Just like I mentioned.  Preparedness is not a popular budget item.  Just human nature

https://www.propublica.org/article/how-new-york-city-emergency-ventilator-stockpile-ended-up-on-the-auction-block

[Wolfcop]

2 hours ago, Tbe said:

The issue is the drug is

#1 toxic and not something you want to give people without clear cause.

#2 In short supply and needed by people with other conditions.

#3 There is no clear data that it is actually helping.

I think most people would love for it to work. They just don’t like the president making people believe that it is going to solve this issue when it might not do anything. 

#3 There are ongoing case studies and doctor's statements that it is making a big difference.

[LinvilleGorge]

Yeah, the problem with the "no clear data" statement is that in terms of drug efficacy, that data normally takes years to accumulate. We won't have that data until this pandemic is over with. We'll be able to look in the rearview and make a determination but at that point it won't matter anymore.

[Ja Rhule]

6 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Yeah, the problem with the "no clear data" statement is that in terms of drug efficacy, that data normally takes years to accumulate. We won't have that data until this pandemic is over with. We'll be able to look in the rearview and make a determination but at that point it won't matter anymore.

The true impact will never be told.  I think the best drug is good immune system.  Get your sleep people.
 

 

Edited April 7, 2020 by Ja Rhule

[stirs]

[Davidson Deac II]

25 minutes ago, stirs said:

Just like I mentioned.  Preparedness is not a popular budget item.  Just human nature

https://www.propublica.org/article/how-new-york-city-emergency-ventilator-stockpile-ended-up-on-the-auction-block

Well, yes and no.  Preparedness for things that happened in the past is relatively easy to get dollars for.  Before 9-11, if they asked congress for money to prepare for a terrorist attack with hijacked airliners, the laughter would have been loud.  Afterwards, it was easy to get money to help prevent another similar attack.  Same with Pearl Harbor.  Human nature I guess to prepare for the threats you know instead of the ones that are mostly theoretical.  We are usually ill prepared the first time something happens, but better the second time.  Assuming the second time is within living memory.  

Edited April 7, 2020 by Davidson Deac II

[stirs]

5 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

Well, yes and no.  Preparedness for things that happened in the past is relatively easy to get dollars for.  Before 9-11, if they asked congress for money to prepare for a terrorist attack with hijacked airliners, the laughter would have been loud.  Afterwards, it was easy to get money to help prevent another similar attack.  Same with Pearl Harbor.  Human nature I guess to prepare for the threats you know instead of the ones that are mostly theoretical.  We are usually ill prepared the first time something happens, but better the second time.  Assuming the second time is within living memory.  

Exactly.  I mentioned in this thread the other day, that budgets for "might happen" things are not popular as they don't garner votes.

It all goes back to human nature in the US.  We elect people that stroke us, who pamper us, who tell us how great we are or how bad off we are.

THAT is who we elect.  We will not put up with some guy wanting to spend loads of our "tax cut" or "entitlement" money on something like buildings full of ventilators.  We are going to vote for guys that give back to us immediately.  So when everyone points fingers, it is an "us" problem.  We are the ones who elect these guys and boring guys doing numbers, are just not our thing here in America.

Yes, we will overspend afterwards, but not before a crisis

[LinvilleGorge]

7 minutes ago, stirs said:

Exactly.  I mentioned in this thread the other day, that budgets for "might happen" things are not popular as they don't garner votes.

It all goes back to human nature in the US.  We elect people that stroke us, who pamper us, who tell us how great we are or how bad off we are.

THAT is who we elect.  We will not put up with some guy wanting to spend loads of our "tax cut" or "entitlement" money on something like buildings full of ventilators.  We are going to vote for guys that give back to us immediately.  So when everyone points fingers, it is an "us" problem.  We are the ones who elect these guys and boring guys doing numbers, are just not our thing here in America.

Yes, we will overspend afterwards, but not before a crisis

Who we elect honestly doesn't matter. Our votes matter on election day and that's it. Our votes are largely driven by who the large donors decide to back because those are the only candidates who can afford to run a campaign that can have a chance to end in getting elected. Once they're in office, all those favors they had to give to get those campaign funds get called in and lobbyists do the rest. Our politicians are just rubber stamps for the people and organizations that put them in office and keep them in office. That's just the sad reality.

[Davidson Deac II]

36 minutes ago, stirs said:

Exactly.  I mentioned in this thread the other day, that budgets for "might happen" things are not popular as they don't garner votes.

It all goes back to human nature in the US.  We elect people that stroke us, who pamper us, who tell us how great we are or how bad off we are.

THAT is who we elect.  We will not put up with some guy wanting to spend loads of our "tax cut" or "entitlement" money on something like buildings full of ventilators.  We are going to vote for guys that give back to us immediately.  So when everyone points fingers, it is an "us" problem.  We are the ones who elect these guys and boring guys doing numbers, are just not our thing here in America.

Yes, we will overspend afterwards, but not before a crisis

FYI, its human nature around the world.

[stirs]

6 minutes ago, Davidson Deac II said:

FYI, its human nature around the world.

At least where there is voting

[stirs]

33 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Who we elect honestly doesn't matter. Our votes matter on election day and that's it. Our votes are largely driven by who the large donors decide to back because those are the only candidates who can afford to run a campaign that can have a chance to end in getting elected. Once they're in office, all those favors they had to give to get those campaign funds get called in and lobbyists do the rest. Our politicians are just rubber stamps for the people and organizations that put them in office and keep them in office. That's just the sad reality.

We are on a really bad path.

Today, Twitter substitutes for real news, well, because "real news" is mimicking Twitter to be opinion based, entertainment broadcasts.

We continue to know less and less and chart the future of our country based on slick 30 second videos which are based on nothing, or lies.  And, NOBODY, will spend the time to learn about candidates.  After all, Survivor is on, I am texting, and so forth.  We are an instagram society with little knowledge of history, the present or the future.

Screwed we are.

[cptx]

43 minutes ago, LinvilleGorge said:

Who we elect honestly doesn't matter. Our votes matter on election day and that's it. Our votes are largely driven by who the large donors decide to back because those are the only candidates who can afford to run a campaign that can have a chance to end in getting elected. Once they're in office, all those favors they had to give to get those campaign funds get called in and lobbyists do the rest. Our politicians are just rubber stamps for the people and organizations that put them in office and keep them in office. That's just the sad reality.

it's almost like a tiny percentage of people owning the vast majority of the wealth is not such a great thing for society.

[Wes21]

3 hours ago, Tbe said:

The issue is the drug is

#1 toxic and not something you want to give people without clear cause.

 

Source please.  Thank you.