Two small cohorts worth of anecdote from France (link to actual study/report inside story)

https://techstartups.com/2020/03/27/...w5juknwnKkEAq0

Anecdotal lab research from China indicating hydroxychloroquine is more effective than chloroquine at inhibiting SARS-CoV-2

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3215...T3ZcRkfSXR1038

I don't blame Fauci for stating evidence is anecdotal...because barring a double-blind placebo study (which I understand is currently underway in New York) there isn't clinical proof of efficacy for treating COVID-19. The medical world doesn't know if it works only in mild cases, or mild and severe cases, or also in critical patients, or not at all, or if its impacts are significant or minor.

"Cure" is waaaaaaaaaaaay too strong a statement to make, with absolutely zero evidence to back it up.

I would submit, however, that global anecdotes are beginning to add up...

One thing, if Axios is right:

Quote:

---

The federal government will cover the costs of coronavirus treatment for the uninsured, Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar said at a White House briefing Friday.

---

If 600K out of 9M in New York City are uninsured, there is a tremendous incentive to say "assumed COVID-19", amirite? Maybe why doctors wonder what happened to all of the heart attacks?

He’s not the leading physician, the US surgeon general is.

Notice a difference when physicians and non physicians are speaking about this. Physicians goal is 0 deaths. Their goal is to save every person and they want to institute ever measure possible to do this. While an admirable goal, it is unrealistic. They also have very set procedures for research and approval of medicine for specific treatments. These are good, but now is different. You want so much for this to go badly to blame the president. It’s very obvious.

Here is my only question. You or anyone very close to you has now been hospitalized, would you take the medicine being discussed here? Or do you decline because “it’s not peer reviewed?”

Of course you take it. What you don't do is say, "Well since they have hydroxychlororquine, we don't need this social distancing crap and the economy can go back to normal now."

If you're inferring that at the rally trump said c19 was a hoax, especially after already shutting down China travel, that can be easily disproved watching the video or seeing what even the WP later said: https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...eo-slam-trump/

Old or compromised. That still seems to be the case. I've seen the "baby dies" of coronavirus but a lot of that quietly gets retracted.

I really don't get the idea of giving up.

I don’t think anyone has said that. I have said and still say, myself and my family are low risk, along with hundreds of millions of others, how about we go back to a MODIFIED normal. I don’t know about you but I, along with tens of millions other are now starring down the barrel of personal financial destruction. I have worked decades to build what I have and it is very likely to be obliterated for this. Nothing we can do now, no putting this back in the box.

This is outrageously false. Every single epidemiologist is not trying to save everyone but to prevent this from overwhelming the healthcare system. To say that physicans are on board with this shutdown to the point of tanking the economy is a stupid argument. Since you guys LOVED comparing it to the flu, how come these "save every life at all costs" physicans don't recommend government shutdowns every flu season?!

There are PLENTY of examples of healthy 30-40 year olds dying. The highest risk is old or immunocompromised but none of us are free and clear

I'm saying that emergency medicine and preventative medicine are two different things. If I or my wife was on a vent and the doctor wanted to try this, OF COURSE I'm doing it. If someone told me to take this pill and then get back to work, I'm asking why then does the director of the NIH and Presidential right hand man keep saying that this isn't THE cure and that we should be careful to not correlate anecdotal evidence with double blind studies.

Well, so far you’re right, no where near the flu.