oldmanfan

He was instructing government officials to look into something that is completely ridiculous. You want your tax dollars used that way?

I would agree it's our job to hold our elected representatives responsible. It is the role of a free press to inform. I agree media should not twist things, regardless of political persuasion.

Again his words: “I see the disinfectant that knocks it out in a minute, one minute,” Trump said during Thursday’s coronavirus press briefing. “And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside, or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets inside the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it would be interesting to check that.” So you are hanging your hat on the fact that he did not say the specific type of disinfectant? And you're saying he didn't imply anything, when he said right here is there a way to inject disinfectant? The words are right in front of you, yet to deny them. It was a dumb things to say. Although he is right on one thing: disinfectants would do a number on the lungs. They would cause all sorts of respiratory issues including potentially death, at least according to the CDC when talking about the one specific disinfectant: bleach. Science matters. Words matter.

The president referred to injecting disinfectants. When he said disinfectants, what exactly do you think he was referring to? Or because he did not specifically name a specific disinfectant it is somehow wrong to question the guy presenting the study about it? You do realize that two very common disinfectants are bleach and Lysol? And while we're at it, exactly how would one get UV light inside the body? These are things he said. Like it or not. And the press is supposed to not ask questions about it? Why can't you just admit that what was said by the president yesterday was dumb?

OK. These are your words regarding bleach, taken right from your post: Swallowing bleach certainly doesn't seem like the thing to do but there are other ways like you stated above, and even something as simple as possibly breathing it in. I know I've breathed in bleach just by using it for cleaning. I don't remember any side affects and there may very well be some benefits. I gave you the CDC guidelines on the effects of breathing in chlorine fumes. But it doesn't address your post in any way. Uh huh. Again, science matters. Science works.

Absolutely correct. The job of the media is to hold our representatives accountable for their words and action. I say that regardless of political affiliation as I am registered as an Independent. Good,

I have no idea where you're going with this. I look at this from the point of view as a scientists and clinician. If you want to throw around insults go somewhere else.

I feel the same. Which is why I say the comments yesterday were irresponsible.

It was both inarticulate and dumb. And then the media followed up. Because that is the media's job. Somebody had to make sure it was clarified that people should not construe those comments to mean that folks should go out and use disinfectants (bleach being an example).

From the CDC: Immediate signs and symptoms of chlorine exposure During or immediately after exposure to dangerous concentrations of chlorine, the following signs and symptoms may develop: Blurred vision Burning pain, redness, and blisters on the skin if exposed to gas. Skin injuries similar to frostbite can occur if it is exposed to liquid chlorine Burning sensation in the nose, throat, and eyes Coughing Chest tightness Difficulty breathing or shortness of breath. Thesemay appear immediately if high concentrations of chlorine gas are inhaled, or they may be delayed if low concentrations of chlorine gas are inhaled. Fluid in the lungs (pulmonary edema) that may be delayed for a few hours Nausea and vomiting Watery eyes Wheezing I say again, science and medicine matter. Science and medicine work.

I hope the answer will be zero. Can you not agree though that throwing out ideas like this do nothing to help and are irresponsible?

I hope I'm wrong that some would actually ingest disinfectant and such, but in a crisis like this it is incumbent on the president to measure his words. And throwing half baked ideas out there with no scientific validity is not what we need right now.

Yes you do. But there are some who hang on his every word. Which is why what was said yesterday was completely irresponsible and dangerous. He specifically said we should look into injecting disinfectants. I gather you're a fan of the president. Then maybe you should tell him words matter, and that he needs to choose them more carefully.

This is nonsense. I know our state health commissioner and she would tell you that. We need testing for both the virus and the antibodies out to all communities as rapidly as possible. Spare me all the conspiracy nut case stuff.

If you look back I said nothing about bleach. Bleach however is a common disinfectant, and one would just hope no one out there is dumb enough to rink it. But then again someone drank aquarium cleaner apparently because they heard about a drug that could help. And they died.

I sit on an FDA panel, although it is a devices panel and not drug related. As one who sits on an FDA panel, and as one who has conducted research and been a part of clinical trials for almost 40 years, I hope I can shed some light here. I would say based on the information I have seen thus far is that none of the studies that have been touted in the lay press are proof, either in a positive or negative sense, for this drug. All of these studies are compromised by have low numbers , none of them from what I have seen match control and experimental populations,. it is not clear if dosages used are the same or not between groups. For example, in the study showing no benefit I do not know if the same severity of patients were looked at in each arm , nor do I know if there were other significant differences between groups. This is precisely why large and formal studies need to be done before making any conclusions. In the interim, doctors are always free to prescribe medicines off-label. In this case of this med, they can do so but they should make it clear there is no real data to say the drug will help, and they are obligated to explain there are significant side effects including the risk of cardiac complications as well as the potential for stroke in some groups. Again, science matters. Science works.

I'm glad your mom was successfully treated. The targeted therapy using monoclonals and liposomes was also the product of decades of experimentation and clinical trials and such. Hardly the same as what was intimated yesterday.

I am not going to discuss anything political here, other than to say Obama is not the president right now. Trump is the president right now, and the response to this pandemic is on him. And he put out something completely irresponsible yesterday. And yes, you do not, in the midst of a pandemic, want to give out false hope to the people. What people need right now is data, they need realistic and sober assessments of the current status of things. They need to know when they can be tested, how we can use testing to go forward, how we can start getting back to normal while also respecting the infectiveness of this virus. They do not need pie in the sky insane ideas just thrown out there. I am a scientist.. Science works. Seeing the complete lack of understanding of science throughout this pandemic so far is disheartening. People claiming for example that the epidemiologists said 1-2 million would die, and then using the current 60k as somehow meaning the epidemiologists were engaged in some conspiracy or wrong, when the precise reason why the death rate has been held down is because we have buy and large listened to the advice of our epidemiologists and infectious disease experts and used appropriate sheltering and social distancing policies to do so.

Presidents have the most powerful platform in the world. Throwing out half baked ideas, then telling his staff to research them, is irresponsible. It gives false hope to the public, and because there are supporters who believe his every word we can only hope that someone doesn't go out there and bake themselves in UV rays or drnk/inject some household disinfectant because of what they ehard yesterday.

Unorthodox Alternative Therapies Marketed to Treat Lyme Disease Paul M. Lantos,1 Eugene D. Shapiro,2 Paul G. Auwaerter,3 Phillip J. Baker,4 John J. Halperin,5,6 Edward McSweegan,7 and Gary P. Wormser8 Author information Article notes Copyright and License information Disclaimer See "Editorial commentary: what constitutes appropriate treatment of post-Lyme disease symptoms and other pain and fatigue syndromes?" on page 1783. This article has been cited by other articles in PMC. Go to: Abstract Background. Some patients with medically unexplained symptoms or alternative medical diagnoses suspect that they chronically suffer from the tick-borne infection Lyme disease. These patients are commonly targeted by providers of alternative therapies. This study was designed to identify and characterize the range of unorthodox alternative therapies advertised to patients with a diagnosis of Lyme disease. Methods. Internet searches using the Google search engine were performed to identify the websites of clinics and services that marketed nonantimicrobial therapies for Lyme disease. We subsequently used the PubMed search engine to identify any scientific studies evaluating such treatments for Lyme disease. Websites were included in our review so long as they advertised a commercial, nonantimicrobial product or service that specifically mentioned utility for Lyme disease. Websites with patient testimonials (such as discussion groups) were excluded unless the testimonial appeared as marketing on a commercial site. Results. More than 30 alternative treatments were identified, which fell into several broad categories: these included oxygen and reactive oxygen therapy; energy and radiation-based therapies; nutritional therapy; chelation and heavy metal therapy; and biological and pharmacological therapies ranging from certain medications without recognized therapeutic effects on Borrelia burgdorgeri to stem cell transplantation. Review of the medical literature did not substantiate efficacy or, in most cases, any rationale for the advertised treatments. Conclusions. Providers of alternative therapies commonly target patients who believe they have Lyme disease. The efficacy of these unconventional treatments for Lyme disease is not supported by scientific evidence, and in many cases they are potentially harmful. Keywords: Lyme disease, Borrelia burgdorferi, alternative, complementary, unorthodox

And they will tell him it is completely absurd. Meanwhile, you have citizens who are not trained in science and medicine listening to this thinking there may be some validity because the president said so. It is irresponsible, dangerous, and stupid.

And then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. And is there a way we can do something like that by injection inside or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs and it does a tremendous number on the lungs, so it’d be interesting to check that, These are the words he used. Again, the idea of internalizing disinfectants or UV light is absurd, and it is sad that you have to be told this. You talk about out of the box? Fine, explain your theory then.

Your quote above indicates he asked about bringing either UV light or disinfectants inside the body. Both of those are completely absurd and an affront to common sense. He said it, he owns it. Period.

Oh come on now. I am a scientist and clinician. That viruses ON SURFACES are susceptible to disinfectants and UV light is hardly a new revelation; we've know that for decades. How long have products like Lysol been on the market after all? I've used UV lights in my lab for 30 years to disinfect surfaces. It was of course right to do the kinds of studies like this on the Corona virus because you have to make sure you know how this particular strain reacts. So from that sense having this data is helpful in terms of knowing how to disinfect surfaces and such. But to somehow think you can extrapolate that to ingesting disinfectants, or somehow absorbing UV rays or light deep into the body, is so devoid of any common sense and so devoid of anything approaching rational scientific thought that it is embarrassing for the country that some folks have to be told this. As President, you cannot just come out and toss half cocked insane ideas out there for the public to consume, because someone uneducated in science and medicine will actually think it's something to try and they will die doing so. Are harmful substances used to treat diseases? Yes. Is radioactive iodine one? No, because the dosages are very small and because iodine concentrates in the thyroid, which is why radioactive iodine is used to treat thyroid cancer. Do we use radiation and chemotherapy to treat cancer? Yes. Do you know why? Because those agents tend to hit rapidly dividing cells, i.e.cancerous cells. Are there terrible side effects of these? Yes. Can they be fatal? Yes. Do qualified medical physicians, nurses, etc. sit with patients and explain those to them so they fully understand the potential positives and negatives of treatment before proceeding? Yes. All these are completely different than having a President who doesn't have the first damn clue about anything medical and scientific throwing out ridiculous and harmful statements at a press conference, and then asking people who know he's crazy to actually study them. There is no reason to study these ideas, they are completely absurd and someone from his staff should have had the guts to say that last night. And the fact that this has to be said in this thread because there are actually citizens of this country who would place any credence in this nonsense is just pathetic.

agree completely