Harnessing the benefits of UVA light treatment in Covid-19 patients
1–10 of 84 posts
Re: Harnessing the benefits of UVA light treatment in Covid-19 patients
#2Lung sunburn! Pardon me while i go scream for a minnit on that thought. I'd rather smoke oak again.
Once unsquicked; it sounds like it might be a little better than ventilator damage and is a lot easier to control so that "burn" shouldn't actually happen.
To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"?
Re: Harnessing the benefits of UVA light treatment in Covid-19 patients
#3Lung sunburn! Pardon me while i go scream for a minnit on that thought. I'd rather smoke oak again. Once unsquicked; it sounds like it might be a little better than ventilator damage and is a lot easier to control so that "burn" shouldn't actually happen. To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"?
> To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"?
Why?
Re: Harnessing the benefits of UVA light treatment in Covid-19 patients
#4Lung sunburn! Pardon me while i go scream for a minnit on that thought. I'd rather smoke oak again. Once unsquicked; it sounds like it might be a little better than ventilator damage and is a lot easier to control so that "burn" shouldn't actually happen. To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"?
> To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"? Why?
to put a stick in the eye of the person eager to jump up with copypasta about how we should be focusing on vaccines instead of other treatments, the response about how all the "treatments" offered so far are scams, the political follow ons, and so on.
Re: Harnessing the benefits of UVA light treatment in Covid-19 patients
#5Earlier quoted context omitted.
> To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"? Why?
to put a stick in the eye of the person eager to jump up with copypasta about how we should be focusing on vaccines instead of other treatments, the response about how all the "treatments" offered so far are scams, the political follow ons, and so on.
Not that those people don't exist, but the whole "I bet those people are going to have this reaction" is just as much political bickering (and therefore conversation poison) as the behavior your predicting.
Re: Harnessing the benefits of UVA light treatment in Covid-19 patients
#6Lung sunburn! Pardon me while i go scream for a minnit on that thought. I'd rather smoke oak again. Once unsquicked; it sounds like it might be a little better than ventilator damage and is a lot easier to control so that "burn" shouldn't actually happen. To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"?
> To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"? Why?
It's a fair question considering that's been a de facto rule on social media, despite people using code words to get around that.
But I am not sure that was ever the case here on HN, so I don't know why they used the word "still".
Re: Harnessing the benefits of UVA light treatment in Covid-19 patients
#7Not to start a political off topic war, but the then sitting president of the US was heavily mocked for suggesting treatment options with UV be evaluated. [1]
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/24/health/sunlight-coronavir...
Re: Harnessing the benefits of UVA light treatment in Covid-19 patients
#8Lung sunburn! Pardon me while i go scream for a minnit on that thought. I'd rather smoke oak again. Once unsquicked; it sounds like it might be a little better than ventilator damage and is a lot easier to control so that "burn" shouldn't actually happen. To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"?
Here is some fuel for your flamewar: this is the exact treatment Trump was riffing off of when the media collectively lost its mind and claimed that he told people to drink bleach.
Re: Harnessing the benefits of UVA light treatment in Covid-19 patients
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
> To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"? Why?
to put a stick in the eye of the person eager to jump up with copypasta about how we should be focusing on vaccines instead of other treatments, the response about how all the "treatments" offered so far are scams, the political follow ons, and so on.
Misinformation is a topic of recent increased interest so citing it will likely bring more engagement.
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=m...
https://trends.google.com/trends/explore?date=all&geo=US&q=m...
Re: Harnessing the benefits of UVA light treatment in Covid-19 patients
#10Lung sunburn! Pardon me while i go scream for a minnit on that thought. I'd rather smoke oak again. Once unsquicked; it sounds like it might be a little better than ventilator damage and is a lot easier to control so that "burn" shouldn't actually happen. To kick off the flamewar: is discussing any treatment but vaccines still == "spreading anti-vax misinformation"?
Vaccine is not treatment. Both have a role.