Latest Coronavirus - Yikes

[Septic]

Do you have any idea the drugs that are administered when someone is on a ventilator and the side effects they all carry alone ?

Are the drugs you're referring to studied for efficacy for the morbidity in which they're being prescribed?

 

[Volsfaninva917]

I understand that you are going to claim to either be an independent or a moderate centrist and say that you voted for Jill Stein in 2016, or perhaps Gary Johnson. That is what everybody says when they are arguing for Trump or in defense of Donald Trump. Maybe it's because I have read it so much on here... I just don't believe it. It's not important to me, though. I don't care who you voted for, or if you even voted at all.

Well, since you asked I originally wanted Allen West to run but he didn't then I settled on Ben Carson or Ted Cruz. Not important to you? You just went out of your way to rant about it lol

 

[0nelilreb]

I understand that you are going to claim to either be an independent or a moderate centrist and say that you voted for Jill Stein in 2016, or perhaps Gary Johnson. That is what everybody says when they are arguing for Trump or in defense of Donald Trump. Maybe it's because I have read it so much on here... I just don't believe it. It's not important to me, though. I don't care who you voted for, or if you even voted at all.

It’s funny to watch someone that b!tches about Trump 24/7 tell someone else I don’t care how you vote .

 

[FLVOL_79]

Since people can be asymptomatic and still spread it... testing has been shown to slow the spread down.

They can be. They can also test negative then catch it the next day. Should we be getting tested every single day? its almost pointless. People legit sick should get tested, thats all.

The earth is just trying to reduce the carbon footprint from humans. Embrace it.

 

[GordonC]

Well, since you asked I originally wanted Allen West to run but he didn't then I settled on Ben Carson or Ted Cruz. Not important to you? You just went out of your way to rant about it lol

Be careful, or you'll wind up going down that rabbit hole of "Whataboutism": it's what people say when they let their emotions of seeing news stories or their hate for something overcome their lack of understanding of process, continuity, and bullsh!ttery in politics.

 

[0nelilreb]

Are the drugs you're referring to studied for efficacy for the morbidity in which they're being prescribed?

Do they STILL cause the side effects ? You know you don’t want to stroll down that road and whistle past the graveyard .

 

[0nelilreb]

Since people can be asymptomatic and still spread it... testing has been shown to slow the spread down.

What testing ? The slowing of the spread only happens if you are following all guideline and have no contact with others . I can tell you for a fact .. that’s not happening , I see it everyday here .

 

[0nelilreb]

They can be. They can also test negative then catch it the next day. Should we be getting tested every single day? its almost pointless. People legit sick should get tested, thats all.

The earth is just trying to reduce the carbon footprint from humans. Embrace it.

This This This .. unless you are tested everyday , it’s close to worthless . Prime example .. health care workers .

 

[Volsfaninva917]

Be careful, or you'll wind up going down that rabbit hole of "Whataboutism": it's what people say when they let their emotions of seeing news stories or their hate for something overcome their lack of understanding of process, continuity, and bullsh!ttery in politics.

All politics and politicians are 100% bullsh!t and @BowlBrother85 you are no better than the Trump homers in supporting your party can do no wrong, Trump did this blah blah blah. Or I should say bah bah bah, sheep

 

[Grey_pilgrim]

They can be. They can also test negative then catch it the next day. Should we be getting tested every single day? its almost pointless. People legit sick should get tested, thats all.

The earth is just trying to reduce the carbon footprint from humans. Embrace it.

Whilst enticing, I’m not taking that bait.

 

[volfanhill]

Bloomberg - Are you a robot?

 

[Septic]

Do they STILL cause the side effects ? You know you don’t want to stroll down that road whistle past the graveyard .

Every drug has side effects, all of them - so I'm not sure what your point is.

The question I posed to you was whether or not the drugs you alluded to were studied for efficacy against the morbidity for which they were being prescribed. Are they?

My point is, If there are no studies proving the efficacy or off label prescribing experience for a drug but there are studies for the disease that show an adverse risk is possible, one would logically assume that a physician would revert back to "First, do no harm" as a guide.

 

[0nelilreb]

Every drug has side effects, all of them - so I'm not sure what your point is.

The question I posed to you was whether or not the drugs you alluded to were studied for efficacy against the morbidity for which they were being prescribed. Are they?

My point is, If there are no studies proving the efficacy or off label prescribing experience for a drug but there are studies for the disease that show an adverse risk is possible, one would logically assume that a physician would revert back to "First, do no harm" as a guide.

Do no harm doesnt mean I’m going to give you this drug even though we all know it’s going to damage your kidneys but it will save your liver does it ? It means you have the power to heal and prescribe the medicine that will heal you , don’t abuse it .

 

[Septic]

Do no harm doesnt mean I’m going to give you this drug even though we all know it’s going to damage your kidneys but it will save your liver does it ? It means you have the power to heal and prescribe the medicine that will heal you , don’t abuse it .

But that's not what's on the menu. Using your example against the drug in question, all we know is the it could "damage your kidneys" with no evidence that it will "save" your liver.

There's a difference and distinction here.

 

[SmokyRiverDog]

Since people can be asymptomatic and still spread it... testing has been shown to slow the spread down.

Since you can be tested as negative and then infected 30 minutes later; its futile, pointless, and giving a false sense of security.

 

[Septic]

Since you can be tested as negative and then infected 30 minutes later; its futile, pointless, and giving a false sense of security.

Unless people are asymptomatic carriers and are shedding the virus unintentionally when they could self isolate.

 

[0nelilreb]

But that's not what's on the menu. Using your example against the drug in question, all we know is the it could "damage your kidneys" with no evidence that it will "save" your liver.

There's a difference and distinction here.

The post was talking about the side effects of the drug in question . As you pointed out to bolster my statement , nothing we use is without side effects it’s the degree of the damage vs the outcome of doing nothing that is in question with this drug . To me liver and kidney hits far outweigh death .

 

[37L1]

Whilst enticing, I’m not taking that bait.

Hoad's etymology gives 'whilst' as a derivation of 'whiles', an adverbial form of 'while'. The 't' on the end is parasitic (cf. among~amongst, amid~amidst, etc.). 'Whilst' started to be used as a conjunction, equivalent to 'while', in the 13th century.
In modern British English, 'whilst' is supposedly a more formal variant of 'while'. It is also, in my experience, particularly beloved of students who write bad essays.

Dominic Watt, Department of Linguistics & Phonetics, University of Leeds​

 

[KB5252]

I don't watch

Is that a condition of the no contact order?

 

[GordonC]

Hoad's etymology gives 'whilst' as a derivation of 'whiles', an adverbial form of 'while'. The 't' on the end is parasitic (cf. among~amongst, amid~amidst, etc.). 'Whilst' started to be used as a conjunction, equivalent to 'while', in the 13th century.
In modern British English, 'whilst' is supposedly a more formal variant of 'while'. It is also, in my experience, particularly beloved of students who write bad essays.

Dominic Watt, Department of Linguistics & Phonetics, University of Leeds​

Good old Hoad. I'm kidding. I don't know who Hoad is, but it's very similar to using myself and other -self/-selves pronouns in bad writing, then HA...sort of like betwixt
Edit: Some archaic words linger.

 

[evillawyer]

Parody, but scarily accurate portrayal of the MAGAnistas.

 

[GordonC]

Parody, but scarily accurate portrayal of the MAGAnistas.

I see what you did there with Sandanistas, those old right-wingers from my home country. Well-played, and since I don't do emojis:

 

[Behr]

I drive by testing sites everyday. Not sure why I would get tested since I'm not sick. Just wasting a test on me for someone else who probably needs it.

Well duh. Lol. I obviously understand it if you're not sick. If you're sick and not sure what it was wouldn't you get tested? If not, why. I'm just curious because I don't get it.

 

[titansvolsfaninga]

Great job in knocking it down.

Knocking what down? If it worked, would they spend all this time and money looking for other drugs?

 

[GordonC]

Knocking what down? If it worked, would they spend all this time and money looking for other drugs?

People in my holler do that a lot actually, and the NRA hats they wear aren't red. I need to school em on that.