Bruno Sardine

I did not say that it demonstrated evidence of clinical efficacy. And no, "Doctors speculatively taking it as a prophylactic" is not an anecdote. What you mean to say is that evidence of the drug's efficacy as a prophylactic is anecdotal. Doctors are, in fact, using the drug prophylactically. As someone else pointed out, ChiTownDoc has mentioned this as well.

It is absolutely the case that some doctors have been taking it prophylactically. https://www.propublica.org/article/doctors-are-hoarding-unproven-coronavirus-medicine-by-writing-prescriptions-for-themselves-and-their-families

I have a question about coughing. I have always been told by physicians that coughing is good because it helps clear mucous. But a coronavirus cough is a dry cough. Does coughing exacerbate inflammation in the lungs? Because if it does, then it seems like the act of coughing itself could worsen the course of this disease.

Wong and I are going to the palace of mirrors.

At some point when people were discussing this previously, the claim was made that zinc is only beneficial in lozenge form – that its palliative properties derive from the interaction between the zinc and the lining of the throat. In other words, zinc in pill form is ineffective against viruses. Would anyone in the know have an opinion?

https://www.nytimes.com/article/coronavirus-body-symptoms.html Quoted from article: Bone marrow and organs like the liver can become inflamed too, said Dr. George Diaz, section leader for infectious diseases at Providence Regional Medical Center in Everett, Wash., whose team treated the first U.S. coronavirus patient... “The virus will actually land on organs like the heart, the kidney, the liver, and may cause some direct damage to those organs,” Dr. Schaffner [infectious disease specialist at Vanderbilt University Medical Center] said. As the body’s immune system shifts into high gear to battle the infection, the resulting inflammation may cause those organs to malfunction...

Possibly this is the basis. Not sure. https://www.scmp.com/news/china/science/article/3074351/coronavirus-can-travel-twice-far-official-safe-distance-and-stay

The article to which I was responding doesn't say if they were tested or not. https://komonews.com/news/coronavirus/12-quarantined-kirkland-firefighters-showing-flu-like-symptoms

As we discuss this issue, some take the view that this virus has been circulating in our cities for weeks and most who contract it are simply asymptomatic or experience only minor symptoms. But here we have something of a control group, no? 12 of 30 first responders are showing flu-like symptoms. How many will end up in the hospital? How many, if any, will die? Seems like an important bellwether of things to come.

Regarding our approach to handling the virus, I think we are handling it much like the Europeans. (Except for Italy, of course, which is operating in crisis mode.) There are no travel suspensions within the Schengen area. People can travel freely, from country to country, by plane, train or automobile. It is business as usual. As in the US, lots of lip service being given as to the potential seriousness of the situation, the need to wash hands and be vigilant and such. Maybe Shady Ray or somebody else in the know can correct me or shed more light on the situation, but it seems to me our approach is in line with the Germans, the French, the Swedes, etc. And it has spread more widely in Europe than it has here.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-japan/japanese-woman-confirmed-as-coronavirus-case-for-second-time-weeks-after-initial-recovery-idUSKCN20L0BI?il=0 Quoted from article: “Once you have the infection, it could remain dormant and with minimal symptoms, and then you can get an exacerbation if it finds its way into the lungs,” said Philip Tierno Jr., Professor of Microbiology and Pathology at NYU School of Medicine. He said much remains unknown about the virus. “I’m not certain that this is not bi-phasic, like anthrax,” he said, meaning the disease appears to go away before recurring.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-health-study/wuhan-woman-with-no-symptoms-infects-five-relatives-with-coronavirus-study-idUSKBN20G00J I don’t see how it doesn’t eventually spread like wildfire here.

The Chinaman is not the issue here, dude.

No. And I learned from a previous thread in the CR that I'm out of my element when it comes to British politics. But I do think it's fair to argue - whatever a schengen waiver is - that pundits and politicians within the UK used the migrant crisis on the continent as fuel for their arguments in favor of Brexit. Perhaps I'm wrong, but I'm guessing that's the case.

It hasn't worked. As I said, it may be a well-intentioned concept, but given human nature it is a recipe for disaster. Advocates like to assert that it's never been actually implemented. A convenient argument which I personally don't buy. Communism is the worst. There, done with hijack.

Since we’re talking about Brexit, I would argue that Brexit itself is part of the fall-out from the 2015 migration crisis. I agree the far-right is using immigration as a boogeyman. In Germany, the Christian Democrats are openly grappling with this issue. They want to be compassionate, but at what cost? As someone who shares your views on human nature, I am not optimistic. Americans like to flagellate themselves and pretend that Europeans are somehow more progressive when it comes to immigration and minority rights. But this is a false perception. We haven’t passed laws like Denmark, which requires mandatory training in “Danish values” for Muslim schoolchildren. We haven’t passed bans on the construction of minarets like Switzerland or banned burqas like any number of European countries. Unlike Europe, we don’t suffer the problem of “parallel societies.”

Admittedly not an expert, but I believe the end goal is to eliminate tyranny and exploitation and create a just society. An admirable goal but unrealistic given human nature (someone needs to be in charge to oversee the transition out of capitalism, opening the door to authoritarianism).

There are many well-intentioned policies which, regrettably, fail as a result of human nature. I would be onboard with communism, for example, if it weren’t for human nature. Though we should strive to improve the human condition, we should also bear in mind our underlying nature. Europe does a poor job integrating immigrants compared to the United States. (An interesting but separate discussion.) It’s become mainstream in Europe for politicians to speak openly of the failure of recent immigrants to adequately integrate. Given your views on human nature, I am surprised you seem not to take into account the destabilizing potential of EU immigration policy (which, again, I assume you support on the basis of other posts).

No, I am definitely not saying that.

Not sure about your stance on immigration, so perhaps I’m being unfair. But I gather from your posts, in which you disparage Brexit supporters and link their opposition to Brexit with their opposition to immigration, that you support EU immigration policy – for example, the decision to welcome millions of non-European immigrants in recent years. But then you declare that human beings are fundamentally tribal and refer to ethnic purges and genocide to make your point. Aren’t these positions incompatible?

Fair enough. I agree with you about Scotland and Northern Ireland. Could care less. Also agree with your opposition to massive subsidies. President Obama stated that not only would the UK not receive preferential treatment in the event of Brexit, but that they would go to the “back of the queue.” I disagree with this approach. I don’t think it behooves the US to rub salt in the UK’s wounds, regardless of one’s feelings about Brexit. If you are correct in your predictions, then it is in our best long-term interest to take a benevolent as opposed to a punitive approach in our dealings with the UK.

That's a really short-term perspective. I would have you take a longer-term perspective. Who's to say the Labour party won't win again someday? If you have an affinity for the Labour party, assume this will happen. Then craft your foreign and trade policy accordingly, with an eye towards the day the UK becomes a country you admire again.

This seems contradictory. If you are worried about Russia and believe that Brexit will prove disastrous for the UK, then you would support the UK - not take the attitude “Fuck ‘em.” A weakened UK helps Russia, harms the United States. On the one hand you express concern for Russian interference in Western democracy. On the other you appear to advocate for a policy approach that would benefit Russia (the UK made their bed now let them sleep in it).

The point you make seems not to take into account rising nationalism in Germany, France and other EU countries, including Italy and Austria. I mean, this can’t be good, right? (Article that talks about the AfD finishing second in state elections in Saxony and Brandenburg last September.) https://www.brookings.edu/blog/order-from-chaos/2019/09/09/the-afd-wolf-is-at-the-door-in-east-germany/ I don’t buy the premise that the EU represents some kind of safe haven for liberal democracy. Given the history of Europe, one could just as easily make the argument that, by detaching itself from the EU, the UK is insulating against, not opening the door to, right-ring nationalism in the future.

I don’t know the first thing about this disease, and don’t pretend to. Your comments about the connection between the aftermath of World War I and the spread of the 1918 flu make sense. But your comments about people dying due to lack of modern medical practices apply to 1917, 1914, 1909, 1899, etc., and thus do not address the extraordinary measures taken by authorities during the 1918 flu pandemic. In many U.S. cities, people who contracted the flu or were suspected of having contracted the flu were quarantined. Placards were placed on the doors of infected persons. Neighbors watched neighbors. If anybody violated quarantine, law enforcement was called. In some cases people were forcibly removed from their houses and placed in hospitals. In others the police camped out at people’s houses. In many locales schools were closed down. Government offices shuttered. Not saying this happened exclusively in 1918, but the extent to which it happened in 1918 was unprecedented. The fact the CDC undertook considerable – and controversial – efforts to reconstruct the 1918 flu virus indicates that, in the eyes of experts, there was something special and unusual about this specific strain of the virus. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/pandemic-resources/reconstruction-1918-virus.html The idea that the 1918 flu “wasn't necessarily more deadly than previous and subsequent flu pandemics” is rebutted by both the CDC and by the dramatic response of medical professionals in 1918 (Wikipedia notwithstanding).