[Rama Set]

Actually, the FE Wiki is almost nothing except quotes from physcists and professionals. I do value professional expertise, who speak about their field.

In contrast, you guys link to Wikipedia articles for your proof. For 'some reason' some random person called something a fraud on Wikipedia, therefore it's true. Right. I'll stick with the MDs and trained and state certified Naturopathic Doctors who research and study that field rather than random Wikipedia articles or your untrained internet opinion that something is fraudulent. In order to really contradict those claims you would need to find other appropriately qualified persons who show experimentally that x treatment is useless. Your opinion and unsatisfactory sources do not cut it.

Yet when the head of NASA’s eclipse team unequivocally disagrees with your position on eclipse prediction you do everything in your power to contradict him. You are not quite linking your beliefs together coherently, Tom.

In the case of Trump making dangerous insinuations about the use of disinfectants you provide a muddy rebuttal using a link that adds nothing to conversation and then try and live in the grey margins over what you are actually saying, then try and pivot the conversation to the failings of your opponents. Who cares if someone who is a doctor said something about disinfectants one time? It doesn’t help settle the issue at hand of whether or not Trump made the suggestion or implied, at best, that the internal use of disinfectants might be helpful. It’s a strange situation where you pipe up to defend him without ever trying to demonstrate the value of what he is suggesting. Instead of trying to impugn his detractors, can you instead tell us what is worthwhile in Trump’s suggestion about disinfectants? That would be much more illuminating.

[Roundy]

Why do you guys take his bait? Wouldn't it make more of a statement to just ignore him when he does something really inane like this?

It would be nice if the mods would split Tom's argument off since the thread kind of stopped being about Trump and started being about Tom ages ago.

[JSS]

I'll stick with the MDs and trained and state certified Naturopathic Doctors who research and study that field rather than random Wikipedia articles or your untrained internet opinion that something is fraudulent.

Yeah, and I'll stick with real doctors.  There is a reason Naturopathic Doctors are not officially recognized or licensed in 30 states, and are outright banned in 6.

Even in states that let Naturopaths call themselves 'Doctor' and treat some conditions, they are still not anywhere at the level of a MD, legally or professionally and don't have the same privileges, education or requirements of a real Doctor. A Nurse has more medical training treating patients than a Naturopathic Doctor.

If I'm going to trust someone with my health, it's going to be a fully licensed doctor who didn't get his education through some shady Naturopathic school.

To anyone thinking of seeing a Naturopathic 'Doctor', don't. They are dangerous, with a mix of some medical training but also full of pseudoscience and unproven 'treatments' that can do more harm than good if not outright kill you.

[JSS]

Why do you guys take his bait? Wouldn't it make more of a statement to just ignore him when he does something really inane like this?

It would be nice if the mods would split Tom's argument off since the thread kind of stopped being about Trump and started being about Tom ages ago.

Taking the bait about who said this or that is one thing, yeah. A lot of that going around, me included.

But when I see someone push Naturopathic 'Doctors' as an alternative to real doctors, that's just dangerous.

Or trying to defend the idea that you should drink bleach. Not a good idea at all.

[Tom Bishop]

I'm not derailing anything. Trump asked whether disinfectants can be used internally. There are Medical Doctors who say that some can.

This is simply a fact. There are medical doctors who say that, and make claims of a beneficial nature. And the debates of the credibility of those doctors or treatments does not change that. The example seen unquestionably had an MD, which makes him a medical professional.

Naturopathic Doctors are licensed to operate by the states with oversight, JSS. They are allowed to call themselves doctors to the public for a reason. And many do have MDs. We just saw one, and you can search and find more easily. You insultingly called him a quack with absolutely no evidence, as if your internet opinion trumps the doctors who say that there is evidence that these treatments are beneficial.

Yet when the head of NASA’s eclipse team unequivocally disagrees with your position on eclipse prediction you do everything in your power to contradict him

A disagreement is not demonstration. We should value evidence by qualified sources, not opinions. Espanek would need to show that the Three Body Problem has been solved for the Sun-Earth-Moon system if he thinks that it has, in order to contradict the physcists who show that it is insoluable. As you should recall, there are physicists who claim to have shown that the problem was generally insoluble except for some special symmetrical cases. That's the stage we are at. Show.

A doctor who doubts Vitamin C IV would likewise need to show that it is useless in order to contradict the research of its beneficial nature, which shows, or at least claims to show, that it is beneficial. A doctor who merely disagreed with the idea of Vitamin Therapy wouldn't fly either. A simple matter of evidence. You guys keep appealing to the evidence of absolutely nothing, as always.

If you guys want to debate this I would suggest taking it to another thread, where you can post your user-generated Wikipedia articles, shout your evidence-less opinions, and maybe find some random person's blog post rant opinion against the research of naturopathic researchers to your heart's content.

[Rama Set]

I'm not derailing anything. Trump asked whether disinfectants can be used internally. There are Medical Doctors who say that some can.

And their evidence has been found to be lacking. Something you haven’t even been disputing. So let’s agree that that MD is irrelevant?

This is simply a fact. There are medical doctors who say that. And the debates of the credibility of those doctors or treatments does not change that. The example seen unquestionably had an MD, which makes him a medical professional.

An irrelevant fact now that we have looked at the evidence he has cited.

A disagreement is not demonstration. We should value evidence by qualified sources, not opinions. Espanek would need to show that the Three Body Problem has been solved for the Sun-Earth-Moon system if he thinks that it has, in order to contradict the physcists who show that it is insoluable. As you should recall, there are physicists who claim to have shown that the problem was generally insoluble except for some special symmetrical cases. That's the stage we are at. Show.

You’ve been shown numerical solutions and discount them for irrational reasons. Your standard is faulty.

A doctor who doubts Vitamin C IV would likewise need to show that it is useless in order to contradict the research of its beneficial nature, which shows, or at least claims to show, that it is beneficial. A doctor who merely disagreed with the idea of Vitamin Therapy wouldn't fly either. A simple matter of evidence. You guys keep appealing to the evidence of absolutely nothing, as always.

The evidence your expert cited was garbage and didn’t support his claim. What else should we be doing?

If you guys want to debate this I would suggest taking it to another thread, where you can post your user-generated Wikipedia articles, shout your evidence-less opinions, and maybe find some random person's blog post rant opinion against the research of naturopathic researchers to your heart's content.

We are addressing your posts. If the responses seem off-topic then maybe question why you posted in the first place. I’m going to take Roundy’s advice at this point.

[Roundy]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/25/us/politics/trump-election-briefings.html

It's almost like supporting a dangerously incompetent megalomaniac might end up having negative consequences, whodathunkit.

Sure the Republicans might lose control of both the executive and legislative branches of government over supporting the President who ultimately suggested injecting bleach into the lungs as a potential cure for coronavirus, but they got their judges, right? That's what it was all about right?

So totally worth it. lololol

[Tom Bishop]

Donald Trump with another spot on prediction.

[Rama Set]

It wasn’t a prediction. He talked about a laboratory that was working with light and heat to kill viruses.

Pre-clinical technology is not quite convincing yet. Just like Trump saying chloroquine could be a gift from god wasn’t spot on as trials are being stopped due to dangerous cardiac events from the treatment. It’s hasty and irresponsible to deliver unearned confidence in possible medical treatments.

There is a good reason why so many messages were sent out for people not to ingest disinfectants after Trump’s pronouncement: people put more credibility in his words than is merited and end up dying.

As has long been said in this thread, POTUS’ words have more weight in people’s minds than an average person’s by virtue of their election and subsequent power they wield. It’s why his tweets are criticized harshly, his “jokes” aren’t take lightly and why he shouldn’t be tempering his communication about potential medical interventions.

[Lord Dave]

Guys guys.  You're missing the glaring obvious:
Tom is 100% correct.
Trump is 100% correct.
That quack doctor is 100% correct.


What do 99% of all viruses need to survive?  A live host.  Kill the host, kill the virus.  Why, heavy ionizing radiation would do it as would high heat (100c), fire, acid, a gun, electricity, and even gravity could do it.

So stop ripping on Tom and start looking at the real solution: mass murder.

[Tom Bishop]

It wasn’t a prediction. He talked about a laboratory that was working with light and heat to kill viruses.

Pre-clinical technology is not quite convincing yet. Just like Trump saying chloroquine could be a gift from god wasn’t spot on as trials are being stopped due to dangerous cardiac events from the treatment. It’s hasty and irresponsible to deliver unearned confidence in possible medical treatments.

There is a good reason why so many messages were sent out for people not to ingest disinfectants after Trump’s pronouncement: people put more credibility in his words than is merited and end up dying.

Really, a drug that has been in very widespread use decades was only now found to have side effects?

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/health/chloroquine-coronavirus-trump.html - "A research trial of coronavirus patients in Brazil ended after patients taking a higher dose of chloroquine, one of the drugs President Trump has promoted, developed irregular heart rates."

It just mean that the Brazilian doctors were prescribing too much, and were not properly following recommended dosages and toxicity limits of a drug which has been widely studied for many decades. It says nothing about whether the drug worked for eliminating coronavirus.

Another study said that the drug was innefective:

https://www.redstate.com/sister-toldjah/2020/04/24/documented-the-mainstream-media-completely-botched-their-reporting-on-the-va-hydroxychloroquine-study/

I found this statement from the study (starting on the bottom of page 13) to be especially important to note (bolded emphasis added):

"Despite propensity score adjustment for a large number of relevant confounders, we cannot rule out the possibility of selection bias or residual confounding. Our study cohort comprised only men whose median age was over 65 years. Therefore, the results may not necessarily reflect outcomes in women or in younger hospitalized populations, nor can they be extrapolated to pediatric patients. Our findings may also be influenced by the demographic composition of patients in our cohort, the majority of whom were black. Disproportionately higher rates of Covid-19-related hospitalization among the black population have also been reported in the United States as a whole."

Wow! So in other words, this “retroactive” study doesn’t really tell us anything at all about how the drug would work on people from other demographics who are under 65 and may not be as sick as some of the patients whose cases were reviewed for this study.

The study was only surveying people ages 65 or older, who had other health conditions and were intubated.

C. Michael Gibson MD:

"Sanjay Gupta reviewing VA "study" on #hydroxychloroquine

Says no benefit of HCQ & 2X as many people died.

Fails to mention that it is not a randomized study & that the differences could be due to confounding (sicker people got HCQ).

We must do better in communicating science"

Veterans Affairs’ Robert Wilkie on yesterday’s hydroxychloroquine study: "That’s an observational study. It’s not a clinical study ... We know the drug has been working on middle-age and younger veterans. And the gov of NY was just in the Oval Office yesterday asking for more"

Lame propaganda. Media and democrats are rooting for the virus.

[honk]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/25/us/politics/trump-election-briefings.html

It's almost like supporting a dangerously incompetent megalomaniac might end up having negative consequences, whodathunkit.

Sure the Republicans might lose control of both the executive and legislative branches of government over supporting the President who ultimately suggested injecting bleach into the lungs as a potential cure for coronavirus, but they got their judges, right? That's what it was all about right?

So totally worth it. lololol

We've been here before. The Access Hollywood tape, Trump publicly siding with Putin, "very fine people," kids taken away from their parents, etc. Republicans won't do more to break with or stand up to Trump beyond occasionally offering a few disappointed words as long as he's still overwhelmingly popular among the base, and said base will never, never stop loving Trump. The virus could kill half the country and they'd praise him as the God-Emperor. He could be caught on camera molesting a kid and they'd sneer, "You triggered, bro?" Nothing is going to change.

[Tom Bishop]

Maybe we should vote for this guy:



No Joe Biden. That's not okay.

[Roundy]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/25/us/politics/trump-election-briefings.html

It's almost like supporting a dangerously incompetent megalomaniac might end up having negative consequences, whodathunkit.

Sure the Republicans might lose control of both the executive and legislative branches of government over supporting the President who ultimately suggested injecting bleach into the lungs as a potential cure for coronavirus, but they got their judges, right? That's what it was all about right?

So totally worth it. lololol

We've been here before. The Access Hollywood tape, Trump publicly siding with Putin, "very fine people," kids taken away from their parents, etc. Republicans won't do more to break with or stand up to Trump beyond occasionally offering a few disappointed words as long as he's still overwhelmingly popular among the base, and said base will never, never stop loving Trump. The virus could kill half the country and they'd praise him as the God-Emperor. He could be caught on camera molesting a kid and they'd sneer, "You triggered, bro?" Nothing is going to change.

I never said that would change. 

I mean, I know better than to blindly trust where polling is now heading into the November elections, but obviously the Republicans are never going to change, and I wasn't even implying that. But support for the president is deteriorating and some current trends suggest he could take some Republicans in the Senate down with him. Susan Collins, for example, is suddenly in a hotly contested race against a nobody and there's every reason to believe that's at least partly because of her support for Trump. Apparently she's not alone. Whether it really means a coming blue wave remains to be seen, but it gives reason to be optimistic.

[Rama Set]

Maybe we should vote for this guy:



No Joe Biden. That's not okay.

How about both candidates suck?

[Dr David Thork]

How about both candidates suck?

Pretty standard US election then.



I'm guessing the Trump sandwich will win again though. 

[GreatATuin]

Donald Trump with another spot on prediction.

But, if Trump himself said his comments on UV and disinfectant were sarcasm? Was he sarcastic when he pretended to be sarcastic? Clearly this man is too much of a genius for us to understand.

[stack]

It's really quite crazy. Trump starts sarcastically 'riffing' during a pandemic briefing and as a result, Lysol, for example, has to spastically update their FAQ:

"Due to recent speculation and social media activity, RB (the makers of Lysol and Dettol) has been asked whether internal administration of disinfectants may be appropriate for investigation or use as a treatment for coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2).

As a global leader in health and hygiene products, we must be clear that under no circumstance should our disinfectant products be administered into the human body (through injection, ingestion, or any other route). As with all products, our disinfectant and hygiene products should only be used as intended and in line with usage guidelines. Please read the label and safety information."
https://www.lysol.com/frequently-asked-questions/

The insanity of it all.

[Tom Bishop]

Whether sarcasm or not, what he was pondering about was fine. Even if we are talking about the disinfectants that can poison you, many pharmaceutical drugs are poisons in high enough quantities. The trick to medical research is to find something that poisons the disease more than it poisons you. The question of how do we make a poison safe for use internally is the basis of much pharmaceutical research.

He definitely did not instruct people to drink Lysol, as the media is immorally implying, like the dishonest liars they absolutely are.

[stack]

Whether sarcasm or not, what he was pondering about was fine. Even if we are talking about the disinfectants that can poison you, many pharmaceutical drugs are poisons in high enough quantities. The trick to medical research is to find something that poisons the disease more than it poisons you. The question of how do we make a poison safe for use internally is the basis of much pharmaceutical research.

He definitely did not instruct people to drink Lysol, as the media is immorally implying, like the dishonest liars they absolutely are.

His 'sarcastic' medicinal musings have no place during a US Presidential Pandemic news briefing. The world is closed for business and people are dying, do you really think 'sarcasm' is appropriate? Regardless of what you think the "trick" to medical research is, DJT shouldn't even be opening his mouth when it comes to Covid treatments. And the media isn't saying he said to drink Lysol, (Actually, he prefers injecting disinfectant to drinking it) the media is calling bullshit on his comments and his lying about them meant to be 'sarcastic'. Watch him again and tell us whether you think he was being sarcastic or not.