• The TUGBBS forums are completely free and open to the public and exist as the absolute best place for owners to get help and advice about their timeshares for more than 27 years!

    Join tens of thousands of other owners just like you here to get any and all Timeshare questions answered!
  • TUG has now saved timeshare owners more than $17,000,000 dollars just by finding us in time to rescind a new Timeshare purchase! A truly incredible milestone!

    Read more here: TUG saves owners more than $17 Million dollars
  • Follow the TUG Member Banner as it travels the world on vacation with Timeshare owners! Also sign up to get the banner sent to you so you can submit a photo of your vacation with the banner to share with TUG! Banner Thread
  • Sign up to get the TUG Newsletter for free! Join tens of thousands of other owners who get this every week! Latest resort reviews and the most important topics discussed by owners during the week!
  • Our official "end my sales presentation early" T-shirts are available again! Also come with the option for a free membership extension with purchase to offset the cost!

    Read more Here
  • A few of the most common links here on the forums for newbies and guests!

The Medical Industrial Complex

Ralph Sir Edward

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
1,462
Points
273
Location
Plano, Texas
I guess it's like those people taking ivermectin for covid. Loonies, tin foil hatters - still disconnected from the rational world
Mr. Tinfoil here.
Which would you rather make for early covid.

Ivermectin

Or

molnupiravir (the new Merck drug in which early trials show a 50% effectiveness, and Merck is trying for a EUA for)
 

davidvel

TUG Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
5,364
Reaction score
2,538
Points
498
Location
No. Cty. San Diego
Resorts Owned
Marriott Shadow Ridge (Villages)
Mr. Tinfoil here.
Which would you rather make for early covid.

Ivermectin

Or

molnupiravir (the new Merck drug in which early trials show a 50% effectiveness, and Merck is trying for a EUA for)
I'd prefer vaccination then mono-clonal antibodies.
 

davidvel

TUG Member
Joined
May 9, 2008
Messages
5,364
Reaction score
2,538
Points
498
Location
No. Cty. San Diego
Resorts Owned
Marriott Shadow Ridge (Villages)
So, they lied because it suited their purpose. You just said it. Lie for this, lie for that. Who decides which lies are justified?
Nope, I didn't say Fauci lied, nice try though. Please show where I said Fauci lied, or where he lied.
 

Ralph Sir Edward

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
1,462
Points
273
Location
Plano, Texas
I could say that your names weren't Brett. . .

But since you are all chiming in, I will ask you - why do you think that molnupiravir should be even considered for human use? How much research have you done?
 

SueDonJ

Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
14,624
Reaction score
3,312
Points
849
Location
Massachusetts and Hilton Head Island
Resorts Owned
Marriott Barony Beach and SurfWatch
I could say that your names weren't Brett. . .

But since you are all chiming in, I will ask you - why do you think that molnupiravir should be even considered for human use? How much research have you done?
None. Zero. Zilch. I'm not qualified or educated to do scientific research on drugs or pandemics.

I don't know if you call it "research" when we read disseminated information and decide whether we can believe it or not, but if you do then my "research" leads me, if I should contract COVID-19, to be comfortable with whatever treatments my qualified medical providers would choose from among any and all that have been approved by the agencies tasked with that approval.
 

joestein

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
1,348
Reaction score
941
Points
324
Location
Marlboro, New Jersey
Nope, I didn't say Fauci lied, nice try though. Please show where I said Fauci lied, or where he lied.
I think I had a quoted SueDonJ. She said:

Good gravy. There's a difference between a political machine protecting itself by saying stupid things meant only to save their own political hides, and the guidance issued by an expert whose professional credibility with respect to pandemics had always been considered unimpeachable.
 

joestein

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
1,348
Reaction score
941
Points
324
Location
Marlboro, New Jersey
FYI - The number of excess deaths for the US between March 7, 2020 and August 20, 2021 (not the entire period of the pandemic) was 788,460. The number of reported Covid deaths during that period was 614,640. That is a difference of about 174,000. So, if the shave off something in the range you cite, the number of reported Covid deaths is fairly accurate.

I should note, that most of what I read has said that coroners during the height of the pandemic did not bother to record all the deaths from Covid in that they were just too busy to check on what the cause of death was. In other words, most experts think that the number of Covid deaths has been under reported, not over reported.
Where did you read that? Everything I have heard says the opposite.

The CARES act allowed a 20% add on allowed for payments to hospitals for treatments on patients had COVID. Seems highly doubtful that doctors or hospitals were letting that money slip by.
 

SueDonJ

Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
14,624
Reaction score
3,312
Points
849
Location
Massachusetts and Hilton Head Island
Resorts Owned
Marriott Barony Beach and SurfWatch
I think I had a quoted SueDonJ. She said:
Nope.

Scroll up. You responded to two different posts with the Fauci-lied-he-admitted-he-lied-he-lies-all-the-time-he's-a-lying-liarly-liar nonsense. One from me, one from David. He's questioning you about the response you gave him.
 
Last edited:

SueDonJ

Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
14,624
Reaction score
3,312
Points
849
Location
Massachusetts and Hilton Head Island
Resorts Owned
Marriott Barony Beach and SurfWatch
... The CARES act allowed a 20% add on allowed for payments to hospitals for treatments on patients had COVID. Seems highly doubtful that doctors or hospitals were letting that money slip by.
Come on, Joe! You spout these talking points as if you've never even tried to understand how they originated and/or why they were co-opted as talking points!

The additional 20% certain allowances under the CARES Act aren't profit for hospitals. They are specific to new drugs/treatments that have full- or EUA-authorization for the treatment of COVID-19, they are specific to Medicare allowances because the existing Medicare schedule under which they are classified does not cover the reasonable costs of these new drug/treatments, and there are specific caps on their use. Also, the coding requirements are such that their patient use can be verified so that hospitals can't falsely claim reimbursement.

New COVID-19 Treatments Add-On Payment (NCTAP)
 
Last edited:

Ralph Sir Edward

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
1,462
Points
273
Location
Plano, Texas
None. Zero. Zilch. I'm not qualified or educated to do scientific research on drugs or pandemics.

I don't know if you call it "research" when we read disseminated information and decide whether we can believe it or not, but if you do then my "research" leads me, if I should contract COVID-19, to be comfortable with whatever treatments my qualified medical providers would choose from among any and all that have been approved by the agencies tasked with that approval.
Which brings me to the original point. How safe is molnupiravir?


As I quoted from another thread here:

"Decoding molnupiravir-induced mutagenesis in SARS-CoV-2 - Available evidence suggests that molnupiravir could become a paradigmatic example in the use of lethal mutagenesis as an antiviral strategy. However, there are inherent risks in this approach. NHC can be metabolized by the host cell to the 2′-deoxyribonucleoside form by the ribonucleotide reductase and then incorporated into the host cell DNA. The mutagenic effect of NHC has been shown in animal cell cultures raising concerns on the potential risk of molnupiravir-induced tumorigenesis and the emergence of detrimental mutations in sperm precursor cell generation and embryo development."

In other words. . . Real risk of higher rates of cancer among those who take the drug (long term side effect - no baseline for analysis yet) and possible birth defects from taking the drug in offspring of affected males (even longer term side effect - and no baseline).

It's your life. . . .
 

SueDonJ

Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
14,624
Reaction score
3,312
Points
849
Location
Massachusetts and Hilton Head Island
Resorts Owned
Marriott Barony Beach and SurfWatch
Which brings me to the original point. How safe is molnupiravir?


As I quoted from another thread here:

"Decoding molnupiravir-induced mutagenesis in SARS-CoV-2 - Available evidence suggests that molnupiravir could become a paradigmatic example in the use of lethal mutagenesis as an antiviral strategy. However, there are inherent risks in this approach. NHC can be metabolized by the host cell to the 2′-deoxyribonucleoside form by the ribonucleotide reductase and then incorporated into the host cell DNA. The mutagenic effect of NHC has been shown in animal cell cultures raising concerns on the potential risk of molnupiravir-induced tumorigenesis and the emergence of detrimental mutations in sperm precursor cell generation and embryo development."

In other words. . . Real risk of higher rates of cancer among those who take the drug (long term side effect - no baseline for analysis yet) and possible birth defects from taking the drug in offspring of affected males (even longer term side effect - and no baseline).

It's your life. . . .
So they're applying for EUA but it hasn't been authorized yet. Is the application and expected use specific to only certain patients, say only those beyond the age at which a later-developing cancer or passing on birth defects would be a risk?
 

Ralph Sir Edward

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2013
Messages
1,590
Reaction score
1,462
Points
273
Location
Plano, Texas
So they're applying for EUA but it hasn't been authorized yet. Is the application and expected use specific to only certain patients, say only those beyond the age at which a later-developing cancer or passing on birth defects would be a risk?
I don't know, and I doubt if you know. My point is - why? With any other sort of drug (other than cancer drugs - This kind of risk is already "baked into the cake" for those, so to speak) Being mutagenic in an animal cell culture would be an automatic development halt. Period. (Remember thalidomide? The extreme case. . . )

So why is Merck going forward with this drug? I ask you, because this is an example of why, people like me don't trust Big Pharma. Or the media that plays up the hype.

Is this tinfoil?
 

SueDonJ

Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
14,624
Reaction score
3,312
Points
849
Location
Massachusetts and Hilton Head Island
Resorts Owned
Marriott Barony Beach and SurfWatch
I don't know, and I doubt if you know. My point is - why? With any other sort of drug (other than cancer drugs - This kind of risk is already "baked into the cake" for those, so to speak) Being mutagenic in an animal cell culture would be an automatic development halt. Period. (Remember thalidomide? The extreme case. . . )

So why is Merck going forward with this drug? I ask you, because this is an example of why, people like me don't trust Big Pharma. Or the media that plays up the hype.

Is this tinfoil?
You're right - of course I don't know! But I don't trust Big Pharma any more or less than I trust other industries/corporations to do only good with their intelligence and fortune! I trust pharmaceuticals, though, if they've gone through the process, and I trust the medical providers that I've personally vetted to provide my care. I like my PCP - she's good about listening, she doesn't automatically suggest a pill for every ailment, she long ago passed my test of not offering antibiotics to treat a viral condition, and she isn't writing prescriptions for her patients to stockpile just-in-case Ivermectin. I'll listen to her until she gives me a reason not to listen to her.

Just based on what you posted here, I'd think that this new Merck drug has limited use for certain patients, so if its authorization is allowed for only that use and only those patients, I wouldn't have a problem with the process. From what I've read elsewhere it has something of a 50% rate of efficacy, not great, but as long as it's not promoted as 'The New Wonder Drug Safe For Everyone!' - and doctors aren't writing prescriptions for patients who aren't presenting with symptoms or a positive test, or patients for whom it should be contraindicated - then it's worth watching but not IMO worth ranting against.

<shrug> That's my uneducated, unstudied, unqualified and unprofessional take. Don't listen to me - ask your doctors!
 

Superchief

TUG Member
Joined
May 6, 2009
Messages
2,164
Reaction score
833
Points
323
Location
Cincinnati, OH
You're right - of course I don't know! But I don't trust Big Pharma any more or less than I trust other industries/corporations to do only good with their intelligence and fortune! I trust pharmaceuticals, though, if they've gone through the process, and I trust the medical providers that I've personally vetted to provide my care. I like my PCP - she's good about listening, she doesn't automatically suggest a pill for every ailment, she long ago passed my test of not offering antibiotics to treat a viral condition, and she isn't writing prescriptions for her patients to stockpile just-in-case Ivermectin. I'll listen to her until she gives me a reason not to listen to her.

<shrug> That's my uneducated, unstudied, unqualified and unprofessional take. Don't listen to me - ask your doctors!
You've hit on the key: Find a PCP you can trust and has your best interest in mind. This is getting to be more difficult. I found a great one and he is retiring in November (only 50) prior to my next physical. It will be difficult to replace him. So many new doctors are driven by corporate protocol, rely on tests rather than patient conversations, and prescribe drugs like candy. This is why many of us have to do a lot of our own research to determine what is best for us.
 

bluehende

TUG Review Crew: Veteran
TUG Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
3,331
Reaction score
3,425
Points
448
Where did you read that? Everything I have heard says the opposite.

The CARES act allowed a 20% add on allowed for payments to hospitals for treatments on patients had COVID. Seems highly doubtful that doctors or hospitals were letting that money slip by.
It costs more to treat a covid patient. But of course that old conspiracy theory that involves the millions that work in health must be true
 

geekette

Guest
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
9,966
Reaction score
4,631
Points
448
He lied. He even admitted he lied. He didn't change his opinion. He lied because he didn't want a run on masks. Still a lie.

Yes - I agree there is a difference. However, I want my medical opinion/advice to be truthful. Just give it to me straight doc!

Obviously they are lying about the hospital overflow as well. I think I proved it with the stats. They lied about where COVID might have come from. They lie about so much. Maybe the better question is when are they telling the truth?
Please show me where Fauci lied and admitted he lied.

Given the lockdowns that were happening, people were to be home, not out and about. If I recall, he was specific in "most ordinary Americans" don't need a mask. He did not say No Mask Anyone, you're cool, get out there and spread it. Context matters, point in time matters. I probably said stupid stuff when I was 5 years old but anyone holding that against me now has a bigger problem than I do for having said anything when I was 5.

But when you refer to "they", who the hell is that?? "They" isn't Fauci. He is his own man and he has been in this field for a long time. "They" are politicians? Nurses? CDC? WHO? Your local health department or hospital administrator? Everyone is a liar? Really??!! Let's get some refrigerator trucks in here and make it look like the body count is higher than it is? For what purpose?

You think hospitals aren't overflowing? That's it's fake news? Cripes, man, go forth and doubt everything but be sure to circle back by with something you find that is actually factual. So we can accuse you of lying.
 

joestein

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
1,348
Reaction score
941
Points
324
Location
Marlboro, New Jersey
Come on, Joe! You spout these talking points as if you've never even tried to understand how they originated and/or why they were co-opted as talking points!

The additional 20% certain allowances under the CARES Act aren't profit for hospitals. They are specific to new drugs/treatments that have full- or EUA-authorization for the treatment of COVID-19, they are specific to Medicare allowances because the existing Medicare schedule under which they are classified does not cover the reasonable costs of these new drug/treatments, and there are specific caps on their use. Also, the coding requirements are such that their patient use can be verified so that hospitals can't falsely claim reimbursement.

New COVID-19 Treatments Add-On Payment (NCTAP)
The comment was they were underreported. No hospital is underreporting when there is additional payments to be made. And why do you think there is no profit being made?
 

joestein

TUG Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
1,348
Reaction score
941
Points
324
Location
Marlboro, New Jersey
Please show me where Fauci lied and admitted he lied.

Given the lockdowns that were happening, people were to be home, not out and about. If I recall, he was specific in "most ordinary Americans" don't need a mask. He did not say No Mask Anyone, you're cool, get out there and spread it. Context matters, point in time matters. I probably said stupid stuff when I was 5 years old but anyone holding that against me now has a bigger problem than I do for having said anything when I was 5.

But when you refer to "they", who the hell is that?? "They" isn't Fauci. He is his own man and he has been in this field for a long time. "They" are politicians? Nurses? CDC? WHO? Your local health department or hospital administrator? Everyone is a liar? Really??!! Let's get some refrigerator trucks in here and make it look like the body count is higher than it is? For what purpose?

You think hospitals aren't overflowing? That's it's fake news? Cripes, man, go forth and doubt everything but be sure to circle back by with something you find that is actually factual. So we can accuse you of lying.
Just google - there are many articles about. There is some spin to say the he really believed that masks were not necessary. Some article agree some don't. Clearly, he did it purposefully based upon interviews he gave.

Here is a piece of an article from Slate:

In March 2020, as the pandemic began, Anthony Fauci, the chief medical adviser to the president of the United States, explained in a 60 Minutes interview that he felt community use of masks was unnecessary. A few months later, he argued that his statements were not meant to imply that he felt the data to justify the use of cloth masks was insufficient. Rather, he said, had he endorsed mask wearing (of any kind), mass panic would ensue and lead to a surgical and N95 mask shortage among health care workers, who needed the masks more.
 

marmite

TUG Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2011
Messages
641
Reaction score
193
Points
253
Location
British Columbia
As to this comment by Dr. Fauci...
A few months later, he argued that his statements were not meant to imply that he felt the data to justify the use of cloth masks was insufficient. Rather, he said, had he endorsed mask wearing (of any kind), mass panic would ensue and lead to a surgical and N95 mask shortage among health care workers, who needed the masks more.
This same type of advice was given in Canada, but (IMO) they were absolutely right to not recommend the masks at that time. People were already wiping out the shelves of cleaning supplies, hand sanitizer, food staples and toilet paper. Then as soon as wearing masks was even a thought, people started selling them on the black market and we had countries competing for them. And not only that, the individual States. So in hindsight, I would agree that they (meaning specifically Fauci or our Canadian government health officials) withheld a recommendation perhaps to be able to secure PPE for healthcare. I have no issue with that reasoning, the healthcare workers needed it the most, and I am okay that my government did what they could to secure it.

If that is a big lie they told that I should be upset about, I'm just not.
 

geekette

Guest
Joined
Jun 6, 2005
Messages
9,966
Reaction score
4,631
Points
448
Just google - there are many articles about. There is some spin to say the he really believed that masks were not necessary. Some article agree some don't. Clearly, he did it purposefully based upon interviews he gave.

Here is a piece of an article from Slate:

In March 2020, as the pandemic began, Anthony Fauci, the chief medical adviser to the president of the United States, explained in a 60 Minutes interview that he felt community use of masks was unnecessary. A few months later, he argued that his statements were not meant to imply that he felt the data to justify the use of cloth masks was insufficient. Rather, he said, had he endorsed mask wearing (of any kind), mass panic would ensue and lead to a surgical and N95 mask shortage among health care workers, who needed the masks more.
No, I'm not going to cruise the internet reading all kinds of crap to prove your point. You call Fauci a liar, you put up the goods. Thank you for supplying the links.

You said he lied. This doesn't sound like lying, it sounds like a doctor trying to do the most good for the most people. "First do no harm", right? But you stick with the first thing he said and refuse to allow someone whose career depends on learning on the fly to learn on the fly and give different guidance as the base of knowledge increases. So I guess you don't ever change your mind when new information reaches you. Good luck with that.

There are a lot of people I'd put on a list of known liars. Fauci isn't one of them.
 

SueDonJ

Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2006
Messages
14,624
Reaction score
3,312
Points
849
Location
Massachusetts and Hilton Head Island
Resorts Owned
Marriott Barony Beach and SurfWatch
The comment was they were underreported. No hospital is underreporting when there is additional payments to be made. And why do you think there is no profit being made?
Who said no profit is being made? Hospitals are big business and the ones that don't turn a profit don't survive.

What I did say is that your contention that numbers are being over-reported because there's a 20% bonus in it for them to do so, is false. The 20% additional reimbursements authorized by the CARES Act were implemented because new more-effective drugs/treatments in the fight against COVID exceed the Medicare allowances for other drugs/treatments in the same class, so an additional 20% Medicare reimbursement was authorized so that Medicare-eligible patients would not be financially unable to gain access to those new more-effective drugs/treatments.
 
Top