11–20 of 84 posts
Lung 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"?
Not 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...
It’s pathetic, even when they post a correction later, they know exactly what they are doing when they play it loose with reporting it is always clearly with a greater purpose to deceive for what they deem a better message.
Even if they essentially seem to claim “oh we had to lie a bit because it was safer”, that should not be acceptable at all.
For example lambasting people for taking Ivermectin by claiming it was horse dewormer, maybe they did this to “protect” a tiny portion of the population who may have otherwise taken horse medicine incorrectly, that shouldn’t be good enough, truth is always going to be the most healthy option overall.
The boy who cried wolf could have told you all this had he not been devoured.
Lung 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.
"Some guy we hate said this might work - quick, write a thousand articles about how he's not smart for recommending it and bring on doctors who have no relevant experience/knowledge/credentials to 'prove them wrong'!"
This UV-A treatment looks very promising for people who have contracted a severe case of the virus. I do like how they're optimizing the UV light to try and find the best wavelength/frequency/etc. of light to avoid any unnecessary harm to the patient. It looks like from what I was reading that ventilators can cause harm to patients? I wasn't aware that was a thing!
Lung 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.
Not 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...
Good journalism is hard to find nowadays. But journalism infested with politics is worse, and so widespread nowadays.
Lung 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"?
No, only if the discussions on other treatments are done without misinformation and some basis on science.
For example, it would be good if you didn't say things like "it sounds like it might be a little better than ventilator damage" when there's no data to back that up, and there's a major difference: ventilators help people stay alive. Even if the UVA treatment worked, you still need something to support patients when their oxygen saturation is dangerously low.
Not 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...
> I asked Bill a question that probably some of you are thinking of, if you're totally into that world, which I find to be very interesting. So, supposing we hit the body with a tremendous—whether it's ultraviolet or just very powerful light—and I think you said that that hasn't been checked, but you're going to test it. And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way, and I think you said you're going to test that too. It sounds interesting…
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 would be interesting to check that. So, that, you're going to have to use medical doctors with. But it sounds—it sounds interesting to me.
Not 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...
Not 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...
- Only five patients were enrolled, median age 56 years.
- One of them died, so 20% mortality in the study group. We can't conclude anything from such a small sample size, of course.
- No causal link can be established at this stage between viral burden and clinical improvement, nor between treatment and viral burden.
In other words, this is just a study to check that UVA light can be further studied without killing patients left and right, and apparently it can. It isn't able to draw conclusions about the efficacy of the treatment.
1: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12325-021-01830-7