Physicians are liable for the negative effects of prescribing medications like this.
Show me the link to the latter claim.
There is no treatment for COVID-19.
optimism and hope that has a basis in reality..
It strikes me as strange that it doesn't have you the slightest bit unnerved that a sitting president is misrepresenting clinical research. But hey, I guess we're just different.
it doesn't make much of a case for using chloroquine or anything associated...
and that many likely believed him at face value,
I very much doubt that my priority would be to put them on an untested, potentially damaging medication to treat it.
14 days later
I have a hard time believing that Israeli troops generally aren't being used to address issues related to illegal immigration, given that it's a near-existential threat for them. Just because they aren't stationed on the border doesn't mean that they aren't functioning in anything related to immigration or anti-terrorism, which are inherently linked in their case. I agree, America having more soldiers wouldn't put most of them on the border. That's part of the difference between Israel and America in this regard.
We're not just talking about desert ecosystems, hence I'm talking about floodplains and river banks (though to be clear, we do prize some desert ecosystems, hence Death Valley, Joshua Tree, the Mojave National Preserve, Red Rock Canyon and others). They do have much broader effects. We could cover those, though I do think it's somewhat tangential to dig into those too deeply.
I guess my perspective is that this "full steam ahead" approach to the wall is inherently damaging if it brushes over considerations of commerce and ecosystems. I agree, the Trump administration is likely a lot more focused on getting it built than on the logistics regarding passage through it. That's generally what I find so problematic in this regard. I understand that they don't feel that another administration would take building the wall seriously (they're probably right), but I don't think these are issues that we can realistically paper over. From my perspective, if Republicans want to show that the wall is a necessity for future administrations to continue building and maintaining, then they should be focused on ensuring that it doesn't cause undue harms that their opponents can continually cite against it. Preparing for these problems makes their positions far less assailable, though I guess that's not the point.
That being said, in a situation where everyone's terrified, it's all the more important for our leaders to present information clearly and correctly. Trump did say that the FDA had approved the use of chloroquine to treat patients infected with COVID-19, which is blatantly false. That sends the message that this is a safe and effective treatment for this infection, which it is not. This treatment has only been tested in vitro, which is insufficient evidence to show that patients should be taking this medication. Trump's statement in no way reflected this, and he can at least partly be blamed for shortages of these drugs across the country, though admittedly, many of these people may have decided to buy these meds based solely on the preliminary scientific evidence. Even if I assume that's entirely the result of people making dumb decisions, though, Trump shouldn't be feeding into those mentalities by bolstering a false narrative about this medication. That in and of itself is dangerous.
