Reply With Quote
The cities and states have done the lion's share of the political heavy lifting on this and will again. I don't expect the pattern of Trump leading from behind and flooding the zone with to change either.
The cities and states have done the lion's share of the political heavy lifting on this and will again. I don't expect the pattern of Trump leading from behind and flooding the zone with to change either.
Genocidal so-called Christian Americans should be embarrassed, shamed, but they simply aren't capable
Doctors Without Borders sends team to Navajo Nation as coronavirus explodes in Native communities
“The organization has teams in Afghanistan, Iran, Sierra Leone, Venezuela and 66 other countries.
It did not, however, have a medical presence in the United States – until now.”
“The team consists of
two physicians,
three nurse/midwives,
a water sanitation specialist,
two logisticians and
a health promoter who specializes in community health education.”
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/05/doctors-without-borders-sends-team-to-navajo-nation-as-coronavirus-explodes-in-native-communities/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaig n=Feed%3A+TheRawStory+%28The+Raw+Story%29
I think the local solution is the best solution. Dont you? What works in NYC is overkill in San Marco's.
Depends. But if that's the case what do we even need the federal government for? Secede.
unless you want to have checkpoints on every entrance/exit of the locality, local solution is not a solution but a failure
to be successful you would need a larger regional solution if not state solution that includes travel restrictions tbqh. (see wuhan)
Are you really so scared you would surrender to a totalitarian lockdown like Wuhan?
i think decisions have to be considered at the local level... but thats also somewhat a recipe for disaster because i doubt each of the localities are going to behave responsibly. this is the time for the leaders to step up
nothing totalitarian about beating a virus
we called the tracing and quarantining totalitarian until we saw it worked for them
plus Italy and other countries have done that too
wake up the virus will change our life sooner r later
It's time for PEOPLE to behave responsibly. We all know the reasonable rules. Marshall Law from the federal or state level is not the answer.
we already know that PEOPLE won't. they've demonstrated that. will a good amount be responsible? yes. majority? sure. but it doesnt take a majority to put the majority at risk
who has proposed martial law?
Martial, but point taken. My only counterpoint is people are already breaking the rules and government leaders are just getting around to recognizing them as they are getting infected. The leaders still aren't doing tbh.
These propaganda pushers make it very easy to vote for Trump tbh. Always pushing bull narratives and conspiracies. It's really a double edged sword for Dems to have all these outlets shilling for them.
Not testing is bad.
Trying to test more than any other country is also bad.
you didn't notice this whole presser represented a complete 180 from his initial stance on testing?
This stupid mother er gets bullied into doing the right thing two months too late because he's always waiting for the polling.
The CDC botched the test. That's why it was delayed. I've mentioned this countless times and you respond with pure rubbish.
This stupid mother er gets bullied into doing the right thing two months too late because he's always waiting for the polling.
It’s totally amazing that that’s what Nathan is taking from that complete meltdown. That it just got easier to vote for Trump.
Sorry, Trump downplayed testing from the start. That has nothing to do with the actual tests.
If you ask DMC, the local solution brought us Di Blasio's genocide of New Yorkers.
Sure.
But when States ask for money and the federal government has already pocketed it large share from taxpayers? Give the damn money to the States.
They have told Trump what they need and hes says find it yourself your citizens already got a break from us???
Of local interest, perhaps
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1204751Dallas and Fort Bend counties in Texas, where decisions are made locally, are on a "locations to watch" list because they have recorded increases in numbers of cases of 116.8 percent and 64.8 percent, respectively.
Another study shows drug touted by Trump doesn’t help coronavirus patients, but it can raise heart attack risk
Another study shows that hydroxychloroquine — a drug President Donald Trump said showed promise in treating the coronavirus — appears to not help Covid-19 patients and, instead, places them at increased risk of heart attack.
Hydroxychloroquine taken in conjunction with azithromycin was associated with “significantly elevated levels of cardiac arrest” even after adjusting for factors such as sex, age, underlying health conditions and more severe illness, according to a new study in the JAMA Network published Monday.
The New York State Department of Health, in partnership with the University of Albany, had been conducting a so-called observational study that researchers hoped could shed some insight into the drug’s potential effectiveness.
Researchers at the University of Albany’s School of Public Health analyzed more than 1,400 medical records of hospitalized patients with Covid-19 across 25 hospitals in the New York metro area between March 15 and March 28.
At least 735 patients received hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin, 271 hydroxychloroquine alone, 211 azithromycin alone, and 221 received neither drug. The researchers said they did not “observe a significant benefit” of the administered drugs.
“This observational study has given us an important early look at some key questions related to prescribing patterns of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and chloroquine,” David Holtgrave, dean at the University of Albany’s School of Public Health and a researcher working with the state, said in a statement to CNBC. “Unfortunately, we did not observe benefits of the most used drug (hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin) in this group of seriously ill, hospitalized patients.”
Observational studies aren’t considered as conclusive as randomized controlled trials, because doctors can prescribe a variety of other drugs to treat an infection. The less formal process, however, can yield faster results and help with the approval process of some treatments.
This is the second study in less than a week to conclude that hydroxychloroquine may not be helpful to patients.
On Thursday, a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that the drug didn’t appear to help hospitalized patients with Covid-19.
That study, funded by the National Ins utes of Health and conducted by researchers at New York-Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York City, looked at 1,376 consecutive patients who showed up at the emergency room with symptoms of coronavirus.
Nearly 60%, or 811 of the patients, received the drug within 48 hours and were found, on average, to be more severely ill than those who didn’t receive the drug, the researchers said. They said the study didn’t find any potential benefit or harm from the drug, adding a rigorous, randomized clinical trial is needed.
The new findings come after the Food and Drug Administration warned consumers against chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine to treat Covid-19 outside a hospital or formal clinical trial setting.
The agency said it became aware of reports of “serious heart rhythm problems” in patients with the virus who were treated with the malaria drugs, often in combination with antibiotic azithromycin, commonly known as a Z-Pak.
Chloroquine was approved by the FDA in 1949 to treat malaria. Hydroxychloroquine is often used by doctors to treat rheumatoid arthritis and lupus.
The researchers said the findings should be considered by physicians and patients in concert with findings from randomized controlled trials, other empirical studies, NIH treatment guidelines and FDA drug safety communications.
Hydroxychloroquine taken in conjunction with azithromycin was associated with “significantly elevated levels of cardiac arrest” even after adjusting for factors such as sex, age, underlying health conditions and more severe illness, according to a new study in the JAMA Network published Monday.
The New York State Department of Health, in partnership with the University of Albany, had been conducting a so-called observational study that researchers hoped could shed some insight into the drug’s potential effectiveness.
Researchers at the University of Albany’s School of Public Health analyzed more than 1,400 medical records of hospitalized patients with Covid-19 across 25 hospitals in the New York metro area between March 15 and March 28.
Mayo Clinic cardiologist on risks of hydroxychloroquine for Covid-19 treatment
At least 735 patients received hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin, 271 hydroxychloroquine alone, 211 azithromycin alone, and 221 received neither drug. The researchers said they did not “observe a significant benefit” of the administered drugs.
“This observational study has given us an important early look at some key questions related to prescribing patterns of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and chloroquine,” David Holtgrave, dean at the University of Albany’s School of Public Health and a researcher working with the state, said in a statement to CNBC. “Unfortunately, we did not observe benefits of the most used drug (hydroxychloroquine with or without azithromycin) in this group of seriously ill, hospitalized patients.”
Observational studies aren’t considered as conclusive as randomized controlled trials, because doctors can prescribe a variety of other drugs to treat an infection. The less formal process, however, can yield faster results and help with the approval process of some treatments.
This is the second study in less than a week to conclude that hydroxychloroquine may not be helpful to patients.
On Thursday, a study published in the New England Journal of Medicine found that the drug didn’t appear to help hospitalized patients with Covid-19.
That study, funded by the National Ins utes of Health and conducted by researchers at New York-Presbyterian Hospital and Columbia University Irving Medical Center in New York City, looked at 1,376 consecutive patients who showed up at the emergency room with symptoms of coronavirus.
Nearly 60%, or 811 of the patients, received the drug within 48 hours and were found, on average, to be more severely ill than those who didn’t receive the drug, the researchers said. They said the study didn’t find any potential benefit or harm from the drug, adding a rigorous, randomized clinical trial is needed.
The new findings come after the Food and Drug Administration warned consumers against chloroquine or hydroxychloroquine to treat Covid-19 outside a hospital or formal clinical trial setting.
The agency said it became aware of reports of “serious heart rhythm problems” in patients with the virus who were treated with the malaria drugs, often in combination with antibiotic azithromycin, commonly known as a Z-Pak.
Chloroquine was approved by the FDA in 1949 to treat malaria. Hydroxychloroquine is often used by doctors to treat rheumatoid arthritis and lupus.
The researchers said the findings should be considered by physicians and patients in concert with findings from randomized controlled trials, other empirical studies, NIH treatment guidelines and FDA drug safety communications.
looks like the final results are in on Dr Trumps miracle elixir. So does Trash get extra credit for the Hydroxychloriquine kills?
The cities and states can't force production of PPE, tests, ventilators, etc.
Why even have rules when we all have common sense!
Jeez
Well you're a racist asshole so I can see why voting for Trump comes very easy to you
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
