posted by ptown_trojans_1
Yup. Classic case of premature publication. At least others called them out and the peer review process works.Still does not change the already published work and concerns about people taking the drug.
lol you’re such a homer. The data they used was from a garbage company. So no one did any research or fact checks whatsoever? That isn’t peer review, the source didn’t exist. C’mon man.
posted by ptown_trojans_1I saw that statement and laughed. I was watching the damn thing with my own eyes on local tv and they did not see any of that. They had 4 anchors on the scene and was providing objective facts on the ground. The anchors did say there would be every so often one person throw something, but then the crowd would self police that person and turn them over to those police. The anchors kept saying compared to the protests over the weekend, Monday was peaceful.
I have watched streamed video (not edited and just one perspective) of the event and saw nothing to support the chief of the park police's statement. However given the numbers of people it was impossible to see everything going on along the line as his camera panned across the situation.
Colleague of mine and I agree that its plausible shit started on Lexington green by a radical dude drinking warm beer out of a barrel all night then hiding in the bushes muttering "fuck these redcoats" while pulling the trigger.
posted by ptown_trojans_1
posted by jmogYou do realize that no one said that the drug prevented infection right?
It was said to help the symptoms AFTER you are already infected. It was the most prescribed drug in France and Italy at the height of the pandemic to help with SYMPTOMS, not prevent infection.
In other words the jagoffs that did the study tested a hypothesis that no one was claiming.
posted by SpockLet me help:
https://www.thelancet.com/lancet/article/s0140673620313246
Didnt want to be subjected to peer review. Sounds legit.
Yup. Classic case of premature publication. At least others called them out and the peer review process works.Still does not change the already published work and concerns about people taking the drug.
I don’t really care about the hydroxychloroquine debate. Well, I care only in the sense I just want to drug that will help everyone that gets Wuhan.
With that being said you definitely came on here to parade about the study and now you downplay it with a “lol classic premature publication.” You don’t see an issue with this? If we can’t even trust our medical and science industry to act ethically, then our society is fucked.
posted by SpockNo classic case of TDS.....just run a FAKE news story that fits your narrative and when it comes out false, the national media has already carried your water for you on prime time TV....the correction never gets the same coverage.
posted by iclfan2lol you’re such a homer. The data they used was from a garbage company. So no one did any research or fact checks whatsoever? That isn’t peer review, the source didn’t exist. C’mon man.
posted by like_thatI don’t really care about the hydroxychloroquine debate. Well, I care only in the sense I just want to drug that will help everyone that gets Wuhan.
With that being said you definitely came on here to parade about the study and now you downplay it with a “lol classic premature publication.” You don’t see an issue with this? If we can’t even trust our medical and science industry to act ethically, then our society is fucked.
If the paper was going to be published in the New England Journal of Medicine, one is to assume it has already passed benchmarks and review. Obviously, that was not the case. It is a very bad look for them and the paper. I assumed, wrongly in this case, that the paper had validity as it was from experts. Whoops there. I was touting it as experts have long claimed there is no evidence the drug works.
I would chalk this up as another case in the long line of examples where expert sources and medical and scientific professionals rush and do not go through the proper procedures and peer review. That has lead to an erosion of trust in experts and the scientific community over the last 20 years.
This virus and the work of the CDC, NIH and others have restored some faith in the view of scientistis and experts, but this report does do some damage to that credibility now.
posted by Fab4Runner
posted by like_thatMattis dropping this definitely hurts Trump, but our nation has an attention span of a goldfish.
The military people I know, including Marines, don't give a fuck. They'll support Trump over someone with the record and reputation of Mattis.
I would hope their loyalties lie not with anyone, but with the constitution.
posted by ptown_trojans_1
posted by iclfan2lol you’re such a homer. The data they used was from a garbage company. So no one did any research or fact checks whatsoever? That isn’t peer review, the source didn’t exist. C’mon man.
posted by like_thatI don’t really care about the hydroxychloroquine debate. Well, I care only in the sense I just want to drug that will help everyone that gets Wuhan.
With that being said you definitely came on here to parade about the study and now you downplay it with a “lol classic premature publication.” You don’t see an issue with this? If we can’t even trust our medical and science industry to act ethically, then our society is fucked.
If the paper was going to be published in the New England Journal of Medicine, one is to assume it has already passed benchmarks and review. Obviously, that was not the case. It is a very bad look for them and the paper. I assumed, wrongly in this case, that the paper had validity as it was from experts. Whoops there. I was touting it as experts have long claimed there is no evidence the drug works.I would chalk this up as another case in the long line of examples where expert sources and medical and scientific professionals rush and do not go through the proper procedures and peer review. That has lead to an erosion of trust in experts and the scientific community over the last 20 years.
This virus and the work of the CDC, NIH and others have restored some faith in the view of scientistis and experts, but this report does do some damage to that credibility now.
So in the future.....why dont you look at everything with a grain of salt? Whatever the media narrative is on something.....go with the opposite.
posted by SpockSo in the future.....why dont you look at everything with a grain of salt? Whatever the media narrative is on something.....go with the opposite.
Cool. Will do. Can you do the same Mr. everything is a conspiracy?
posted by ptown_trojans_1Cool. Will do. Can you do the same Mr. everything is a conspiracy?
Funny but the conspiracies have turned out to be true.
Trump said it was coming back bigly. This may be the start. Despite the horrific financial incentive to stay at home by the dems in the relief bill (giving people more money then they deserve) unemployment rates fell to 13%. All the so called experts predicted 20%+
posted by Spock
Funny but the conspiracies have turned out to be true.
LOL. Riiiight.
posted by Spock
Trump said it was coming back bigly. This may be the start. Despite the horrific financial incentive to stay at home by the dems in the relief bill (giving people more money then they deserve) unemployment rates fell to 13%. All the so called experts predicted 20%+
Yeah, that was a surprise, and good one. To see economists flip their shit is kinda funny. Crazy libs are online saying the numbers are cooked., which is hilarious.
posted by ptown_trojans_1LOL. Riiiight.
posted by Spock
Trump said it was coming back bigly. This may be the start. Despite the horrific financial incentive to stay at home by the dems in the relief bill (giving people more money then they deserve) unemployment rates fell to 13%. All the so called experts predicted 20%+
Yeah, that was a surprise, and good one. To see economists flip their shit is kinda funny. Crazy libs are online saying the numbers are cooked., which is hilarious.
THey may be....Obama got caught all the time throwing out fake numbers that were just revised weeks later. But the headlines already did the damage.
posted by ptown_trojans_1Yeah, that was a surprise, and good one. To see economists flip their shit is kinda funny. Crazy libs are online saying the numbers are cooked., which is hilarious.
Yea, people being mad about an economic recovery and somehow try to say BLS is infected by Trump is pretty ridiculous. Hopefully this isn’t just a blip due to the PPP having to keep employees on for a couple of months. Some of the numbers I saw look like it’s a lot of health industry coming back (Dentists and elective procedure type people). Gotta start opening everything up to not see the rate go back up after PPP wears off.
posted by Spock
Trump said it was coming back bigly. This may be the start. Despite the horrific financial incentive to stay at home by the dems in the relief bill (giving people more money then they deserve) unemployment rates fell to 13%. All the so called experts predicted 20%+
I had my best income month, in 27 years as an executive recruiter, placing candidates in May. I don't need a crystal ball to see that when this (employment/hiring) starts coming back, it's going to explode. Hopefully right before the election.
posted by ptown_trojans_1
posted by iclfan2lol you’re such a homer. The data they used was from a garbage company. So no one did any research or fact checks whatsoever? That isn’t peer review, the source didn’t exist. C’mon man.
posted by like_thatI don’t really care about the hydroxychloroquine debate. Well, I care only in the sense I just want to drug that will help everyone that gets Wuhan.
With that being said you definitely came on here to parade about the study and now you downplay it with a “lol classic premature publication.” You don’t see an issue with this? If we can’t even trust our medical and science industry to act ethically, then our society is fucked.
If the paper was going to be published in the New England Journal of Medicine, one is to assume it has already passed benchmarks and review. Obviously, that was not the case. It is a very bad look for them and the paper. I assumed, wrongly in this case, that the paper had validity as it was from experts. Whoops there. I was touting it as experts have long claimed there is no evidence the drug works.I would chalk this up as another case in the long line of examples where expert sources and medical and scientific professionals rush and do not go through the proper procedures and peer review. That has lead to an erosion of trust in experts and the scientific community over the last 20 years.
This virus and the work of the CDC, NIH and others have restored some faith in the view of scientistis and experts, but this report does do some damage to that credibility now.
You still ignored my comment, that the supposed "study" wasn't even studying something that anyone said or claimed. No one said that the drug prevented infection, so why study that? They said that the drug helped with the symptoms once you were already infected.
Donald Trump has said he hopes George Floyd is "looking down right now" and saying the decline in US unemployment announced on Friday is a "great thing that's happening for our country".
I'm a bit surprised he didn't "misspeak" and say looking up at us. Stay classy Donny.
His whole spiel was a doozy today.
posted by RotinajDonald Trump has said he hopes George Floyd is "looking down right now" and saying the decline in US unemployment announced on Friday is a "great thing that's happening for our country".
I'm a bit surprised he didn't "misspeak" and say looking up at us. Stay classy Donny.
I read about that. I have to admit that, even given how he's talked and acted over the past few years, this left me a bit "WTF!?!?" taken aback.
So, you have a black dude straight-up killed by cops for no reason. So, this leads to protests, riots, activism, tons of social media stuff, etc. to the degree that tensions have been really high. On a completely unrelated topic, there was good news on the economy and, with all the negativity going on, he felt it was a good idea to bring up something positive. So far, no complaints. Finding good news to announce in troubled times is cool.
And then he tries to tie those things together in the most clumsily stupid way possible. Yeah, I'm sure in hypothetical heaven afterlife magic land, dude is watching that speech and thinking, "Man, getting murdered and all sucked, but DAMN IT'S NICE TO HAVE GOOD ECONOMIC NEWS!!!!!! I mean, for the living and all. Won't do anything for me and has nothing to do with any moves being made to help prevent shit like that from happening to anyone else, but ECONOMY, PEOPLE!!!!!"
His impulse control when speaking is like mine with pizza. That isn't a good thing.
Sigh, Trump says a lot of stupid shit, we don’t have to make up more stuff he said. He said it’s a great day for equality. It is still stupid to even invoke Floyd, but he wasn’t talking about the jobs report. I’m sure I’ll be called a Trump defender, but it literally wasn’t what he said, it’s just what the media said he said.
“He continued, looking up from his notes: "We all saw what happened last week. We can't let that happen. Hopefully, George is looking down right now, and saying 'This is a great thing that's happening for our country.' This is a great day for him, it's a great day for everybody. … This is a great, great day in terms of equality.”
You can read the speech here.
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/06/05/trump-unemployment-george-floyd-303315
Huh, and I also a National Review article saying that a lot of reporters misrepresented his comments. I stand corrected. Seems from your link, the press conference was his usual show where he said what he wanted to say and then ignored any attempts to ask questions, but he didn't connect the two things.
I listened to the whole thing, didn't think he was saying George Floyd should be happy about the jobs numbers, but still thought it was a dumb thing to say. Still, I took more issue with his overall incoherence.
