OldLady
Diamond Member
- Nov 16, 2015
- 69,568
- 19,607
Yeah, the subject of the comment is irrelevant to smear machines, or any other facts.But Trump asked about disinfectants being injected to clean the system. You've seen the clip by now, I'm sure. So yeah, there are going to be jokes about Drano etc., but you can stop pretending there is no reason for the hilarity.there was NO "drano or lysol" mentioned except by the mental midget heel nippers in this thread...
If you can dupe stooges with lies that is all that matters to Libtard Big Lie buttheads.Bryan continued by noting that DHS also tested if certain types of disinfectant could kill the coronavirus.Yes ultraviolet light can kill the virus if the exposure is long enough and the light is intense enough but so will chlorine bleach. It certainly could have a use as disinfectant but certainly not as a treatment. You can not disinfect the lungs. UV light damages cells. If somehow you could expose the lungs to high levels of UV, it would most probably kill the patient long before Covid 19 did.
“We’ve tested bleach, we’ve tested isopropyl alcohol on the virus, specifically in saliva or in respiratory fluids, and I can tell you that bleach will kill the virus in five minutes,” Bryan said. “Isopropyl alcohol will kill the virus in 30 seconds, and that’s with no manipulation, no rubbing. Just bring it on and leaving it go. You rub it and it goes away even faster.”
Bryan added, “We’re also looking at other disinfectants, specifically looking at the COVID-19 virus in saliva.”
Immediately following these remarks, Trump said:
A few moments later, ABC News reporter Jon Karl asked Bryan, “The president mentioned the idea of a cleaner, bleach and isopropyl alcohol emerging. There’s no scenario where that could be injected into a person, is there?”So, I’m going to ask 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 when we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it’s ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said 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. 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’d be interesting to check that, so that you’re going to have to use medical doctors with, but it sounds interesting to me. So, we’ll see, but the whole concept of the light, the way it kills it in one minute. That’s pretty powerful.
“No, I’m here to talk about the finds that we had in the study,” Bryan responded. “We don’t do that within that lab at our labs.”
Trump then clarified his remarks: “It wouldn’t be through injections, you’re talking about almost a cleaning and sterilization of an area. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t work, but it certainly has a big affect if it’s on a stationary object.”
Trump later raised the possibility of whether UV rays could kill the coronavirus if it was on a person’s skin, in particular if it were on their hands.
“If they’re outside, right, and their hands are exposed to the sun, will that kill it as though it were a piece of metal or something else?” Trump asked.
“I don’t want to say it will at the same rate because it’s a non-porous surface, but what we do know is that we looked at the worst case scenario and the virus lives longer on non-porous surfaces,” Bryan responded. “So porous surfaces, it doesn’t live quite as long, so in theory what you said is correct.”
Left-wing activist Chris D. Jackson wrote that Trump had “urged Americans to inject themselves with disinfectant.”
Why did you not highlight the part of Trump's statement that actually spoke to the argument? THAT is what people are laughing about. You can spin it all you want, but he asked if they had looked into injecting disinfectant yet. He was NOT talking about the UV thing at that point. He was clear about that.
Trump was asking questions about on-going research. How in the world did that get morphed into him recommending injecting anything?
HE didn't recommend it. There are some pretty dumb people out there who would hear those comments and think hey, that's a great idea. And drink more poison, like the fish tank couple. But I have discovered in the past day or so that there is actually a guy out there touting cure by bleach--for everything from autism to now Covid 19. I don't know how the FDA is allowing him to get away with it, but he even admitted publicly that he sent a letter to the President, advising him of this cure. I'm not saying Trump knew anything about this guy, but there are people out there who already believe this shit. Trump's comments about this? Stupid talk for stupid people.
And Trump's comments will only feed those beliefs. This is why presidents should not make comments about things they know nothing about. Trump lacks the knowledge which means he will use the wrong words and phrases to express his ideas. He will be misinterpreted and create confusion among both the public and his administration which forces him to have additional news conferences to try explain what he meant. Along the way, either Trump or his defenders will make questionable statements which will create more controversy for his administration to deal with. A far better path is for the president to speak only about what truly understands and leave the medical science to experts he has hired.
Hey... do you think President Trump just makes these things up?
For example here is a "latest study" regarding Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin
Professor Didier Raoult Releases the Results of a New Hydroxychloroquine Treatment Study on 1061 Patients
Posted on April 9, 2020
by covexit
The new study, of which the abstract was released today, was performed at IHU Méditerranée Infection, Marseille, France. A cohort of 1061 COVID-19 patients, treated for at least 3 days with the Hydroxychloroquine-Azithromycin (HCQ-AZ) combination and a follow-up of at least 9 days was investigated.
Key findings are:
•No cardiac toxicity was observed.
•A good clinical outcome and virological cure was obtained in 973 patients within 10 days (91.7%).
A poor outcome was observed for 46 patients (4.3%); 10 were transferred to intensive care units,
5 patients died (0.47%) (74-95 years old) and 31 required 10 days of hospitalization or more.
The authors conclude that:
“The HCQ-AZ combination, when started immediately after diagnosis, is a safe and efficient treatment for COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients. It avoids worsening and clears virus persistence and contagiosity in most cases.”
Professor Diddle is a know-nothing hack.
![]()
More deaths, no benefit from malaria drug in VA virus study
A malaria drug widely touted by President Donald Trump for treating the new coronavirus showed no benefit in a large analysis of its use in U.S. veterans hospitals.apnews.com
The Brazil study is seriously flawed.. And everyone KNOWS it... The 6200 physicians in Europe were mostly all adhering to the protocol of 400mg.. The BRAZIL study used a RANGE of doses ALL HIGHER than anything recommended from the Euro experience and THREEE TIMES as high (at the peak dosage) than what is given to Lupus or RArthritis patients.. They used 450 to 600mg...
FROM THE LINK --
Earlier this month, scientists in Brazil stopped part of a study testing chloroquine, an older drug similar to hydroxychloroquine, after heart rhythm problems developed in one-quarter of people given the higher of two doses being tested.
"GIVEN THE HIGHER DOSE" --- ANY US cardiologist could tell you that doses like THAT require an initial baseline EKG and constant monitoring.. And that same monitoring is prescribed for ANY cardiac compromised individuals EVEN on the 400 mg... They PROVED NOTHING but the standard guidelines on prescribing the drug that ALREADY exist...
My link isn't about the Brazil study. What was wrong with the VA study?
Where is that link, Dr. Love? This thread has gotten really, really long, but I'm interested.
![]()
More deaths, no benefit from malaria drug in VA virus study
A malaria drug widely touted by President Donald Trump for treating the new coronavirus showed no benefit in a large analysis of its use in U.S. veterans hospitals.apnews.com
What was wrong with the Virginia study is that included only 368 patients, and it was a record review. That at least explains why there was no control group. The group had either recovered or died and they did not take into account when in the disease process the regimen was started. The FDA relaxed it's regulations against prescribing hydroxychloroquine for treatment of Covid 19 in compassionate use situations--a last ditch effort. Is that what happened here? The findings from studies so far are very positive if the treatment is begun at the very beginning. That finding isn't the last word, either. There is much to do, and the results of many more studies to consider.
I know you're a true blue-er, Dr. Love, but you're pushing this Virginia finding and saying it "proves" hydroxychloroquine and Azithromycin don't work because it makes the President look bad. That's not a good reason. Wait for the science. They're not finished, yet.
Last edited: