Reckless politicization of COVID-19

NBC Trump vs Fauci.

The link isn’t terribly useful other than as an example. Basically, knowledge about the Novel Coronavirus has evolved rapidly and Fauci stated, and advised President Trump, based on the state of knowledge at the moment, which often was shown to be wrong in a few weeks. One of the problems is that Fauci, himself, can’t seem to remember what he said last week, and criticizes Trump for acting or speaking on the advice he gave him a week earlier. And Trump, of course, reacts to criticism.

Democrats and the press add fuel to the fire by treating Fauci as a god, and then blasting Trump in hindsight for saying the same thing Fauci said.

For example, Trump is being criticized for saying that the virus would burn out in the summer,  yet Fauci himself predicted that, because other coronaviruses such as MERS, SARS and the common cold did not spread in summer he expected the same would happen with COVID-19. Fauci was more guarded in his wording but they basically said the same thing. But no one seems to remember Fauci saying that, yet the statement is raised against Trump every time the virus is discussed. (You might remember one small voice pointing out that since the virus was spreading in Thailand in March, where it is hot and muggy all year, that might not be so.)

President Trump, based on early, anecdotal reports, said that hydrochloroquine might be a game changer,  and immediately the partisan establishment set out to disprove the usefulness of the drug, and based on testing on gravely ill patients late in the course of the disease, triumphantly declared Trump wrong. But those studies did not use the drug as recommended by its advocates, early in the course of the disease, in combination with Zinc and an antibiotic. Yet for over a month, the use of HCQ was discouraged based on that study before the Ford Health Care network proved that used early as intended it cut the death rate and development of serious disease in half. How many died or spent weeks on a ventilator because of that rush to prove Trump wrong?

When a new and different disease comes along, early guesses at what will happen will often prove to be wrong later. That is to be expected, and policy should change as knowledge develops, but in this day of “gotcha” politics, that leads to people digging in their heels when they should change course.

Just as bad, issues get mixed. Much of the current anti-mask sentiment in Virginia, and around the country, is a misplaced reaction to Northam’s gloating over gun control as 2nd Amendment advocates took up opposing anything Northam said as a liberty issue. Right now, if Northam said the sky is blue, there would be protests that it was indeed orange.

This injection of politics into science started with climate change and has become toxic to the extreme. Missteps will be made in every field of science as knowledge evolves, Richard Feynman told us that science was the process of proving the experts to be wrong, and that is not a criticism of the experts, but an acknowledgment that science changes with new knowledge.

It is time to drop the politicization of science and medicine before it kills us.

20 thoughts on “Reckless politicization of COVID-19

  1. Yes, science evolves. And the science admits mistakes. The mask issue was to protect frontline workers from inadequate supplies because of the administrative issue of not having checked stockpiles years ago.

    “ Just as bad, issues get mixed. Much of the current anti-mask sentiment in Virginia, and around the country, is a misplaced reaction to Northam’s gloating over gun control as 2nd Amendment advocates took up opposing anything Northam said as a liberty issue. Right now, if Northam said the sky is blue, there would be protests that it was indeed orange.”

    Give us a break. Are you saying Americans are so immature and thoughtless that a gun control issue is a reason to infect others. That doesn’t say much for the gun lobby does it?

    And you can bet some of those maskless yahoos are the first to complain about “law and order” while infecting innocent Americans with a deadly virus.

    How many people have died as a direct result of the protests? Compare that to the probable number of deaths from a virus spread by the thoughtless unmasked #LIBERATE jokers.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I didn’t say all the wrong was on one side.

      But Northam seems to glory in rubbing gun control in people’s faces, and gun owners are so angry that they will not accept his version of the color of the sky.

      Northam just had a big deal signing ceremony for the gun control laws that had already been signed and gone into effect 7 days earlier. He just appointed Lori Haas to the crime commission which is supposed to objectively look at the gun control bills that did not pass last January. She is a paid Bloomberg gun control lobbyist.

      If his intent is anything other than to make gun owners across the country furious, he needs a better PR consultant. He clearly wants to goad 2nd amendment advocates to rage.

      But the primary politicization of the virus is by Democrats and the media, wanting the issue more than good policy.

      The HCQ issue alone has taken thousands of lives that could have been saved.


      1. “But the primary politicization of the virus is by Democrats and the media, wanting the issue more than good policy.

        The HCQ issue alone has taken thousands of lives that could have been saved.“

        With all due respect, that is pure, unadulterated BS.

        The media and most Democrats were sounding the alarm while the administration was telling us the virus was no big deal. It’s propaganda arm, FOX pundits, Rush and his cohorts, were telling us it was the common cold. Be gone by April. Attention to the virus was a devious plot, a political hoax.

        The media and Democrats also warned, along with Fauci, about opening too soon. But soon they did and now are paying the price of extending lockdowns and economic damage. “Good policy” my butt.

        There are now more, and better, protocols than HCQ and getting better as we go. Besides, the administration dropped the HCQ a few weeks ago as not effective. So blame them if anything.

        And blaming gun control for an excuse not to wear masks? Again, that is either wrong or the gun folks are so terminally ignorant and selfish that they will kill by infection to get what they want.


        1. Really?

          What protocol is more successful than HCQ in the early stages of the disease?

          Convalescent Plasma IG serums might be, but the FDA won’t even discuss them, preferring the inpatient IV route.

          There has been a lot of advance in combating the cytokine storm later on, but HCQ remains the best alternative for outpatient use to prevent that necessity.


          1. There are probably a half million doctors worldwide treating COVID patients. Are they all wrong?

            But like I said, talk to the administration. They praised HCQ and now they shut it down.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. No they’re not wrong, they are overwhelmingly using HCQ.

            The FDA revoked its EUA on June 15 in response to a Lancet article that has since been retracted.

            Now the FDA advises against the use of HCQ outside of hospitals but it remains a useful treatment.


          3. Like I said, if you think what the FDA did was wrong, contact the administration. It is their bailiwick and has been since January 2017.

            Liked by 1 person

          4. “The vast majority received the drug soon after admission; 82% within 24 hours and 91% within 48 hours of admission. All patients in the study were 18 or over with a median age of 64 years; 51% were men and 56% African American.

            “And the data here is clear that there was benefit to using the drug as a treatment for sick, hospitalized patients.”

            ““Currently, the drug should be used only in hospitalized patients with appropriate monitoring, and as part of study protocols, in accordance with all relevant federal regulations,” Dr. Zervos said.”

            So what this tells us is that only patients sick enough to be hospitalized were tested. This is hardly a prophylactic treatment or even a mild symptom preventative use that you have been insisting on.

            They are doing a follow up test to see if prophylactic use among frontline workers will be effective. And note that all patients are carefully monitored for reactions by HCQ.

            And statistically, the downtick from 26% to 13% means that the vast majority had no effects either way. So the emphasis in the report that it should be only in carefully monitored situations, like hospitals, still stands.

            Do you think the administration will loosen its standards on HCQ after this study? Even considering the recommended restrictions for efficacy and safety.

            Liked by 1 person

          5. The downtick is a cut of half the mortality. !30K Americans have died, How many might have been saved had HCQ been employed EARLY in their disease instead of as a last resort.

            Millions of people take HCQ on a daily, outpatient basis for malaria, lupus and arthritis with no ill effects, and they have dine so for 40 years. Now suddenly it is too dangerous to be used outside of a hospital? Apply a bit of critical thinking,

            The FDA never admits when it is wrong.

            The rational thing to do would be to ramp up production of HCQ(which is scalable) and make it OTC.


          6. I don’t know the regimen for the lupus/malaria/arthritis folks. I suspect they are monitored. Plus I would bet that many over the years may have suffered cardiac issues or died. But the alternative of pain or death by other means is worse.

            I think we already have millions of pills from India and elsewhere, so availability should be no problem.

            The administration has the reins. Their call.

            Liked by 1 person

          7. Sure, and when Trump orders it to be OTC, or at least prescribeable by Primary Care doctors(currently only hospital based doctors can prescribe it for COVID) and one person dies while taking it, all the Democrats and the media will see is that one death and not the tens of thousands who never even get sick enough to go to the hospital.

            That’s why I say that the politicization of COVID is killing us.


  2. This has to be the most telling part of this story:

    “A senior administration official told CNN some White House officials don’t trust Fauci because they don’t think he has Trump’s best interests in mind, pointing to statements were he publicly disagreed with Trump.”

    Dr. Fauci’s job is not to have Donald Trump’s best interests in mind, but those of the public. He is not supposed to be a parrot for POTUS. He is a doctor and scientist, NOT a politician. If the WH is so upset with Fauci’s actions, fire him and hire Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz. Those guys are on the Trump train and will look out for his best interests.


    1. You know about chain of command, don’t you?

      Certainly, if Fauci thinks Trump is wrong or new, contradictory information becomes available, he should tell Trump, not run to CNN to contradict him


      1. WTF does this have to do with chain of command? NOTHING! ZIP! NADA! It is not in OUR best interests for any scientist or doctor to have Donald Trump’s best interest in mind. That would be like saying you diagnosed one of your patients with a serious infection because it was in the best interest of your wife.

        How many times did Fauci contradict Trump at the podium right after Trump says something? He didn’t go running to CNN, he did it in real time.

        And he hasn’t been able to brief Trump in over 2 months. Apparently because Trump does not know how to react to bad news.


        1. Chain of command has value outside the military. Federal employees report to the President and have channels for that purpose.

          Fauci can send his concerns to the President through the Dept of Health, but it is important that the administration speak with one voice. If Fauci feels important information is being withheld, there are written whistleblower protections and procedures.

          But simply going around the President to the press is never proper.


          1. Fauci did speak with Trump during those asinine updates.

            Trump doesn’t even pay attention to intelligence briefings, why do you think he would listen to Fauci.

            Fauci has a sterling reputation in the field. And, unlike Trump, he genuinely cares about America. So if Trump lies about this crisis, Fauci will go his own path. As a patriot should when faced with corruption and ignorance that is hurting our nation.

            Liked by 1 person

          2. And yet the exact same statements that turned out to be wrong by Fauci and repeated by Trump are evidence of changing information for the former and and ignorance for the latter.


          3. “But simply going around the President to the press is never proper.”

            Why? The president lies about everything so how else to get the truth out.

            The Trump campaign is now running ads against Fauci, taking out of context quotes to smear him

            He is not a politician. He has worked his butt off to get a handle on this crisis and now the administration turns on him because they don’t like his messages.

            To borrow from Trump himself, the administration and the campaign are “human scum”.


            Liked by 1 person

          4. …”there are written whistleblower protections and procedures.”

            Ask Lt. Col (RET) Vindman about how well THAT works. And HE went to Congress!

            He is not going around the President. The President doesn’t listen to him. Regardless of what the Press Secretary said about the “task force”. If the lead infectious disease doctor in the country is not being listened to by the leader of the country, how can we trust anything Trump says about the virus. Still waiting for that heat miracle when it will all go away.

            And I ask you again: How many times did Fauci contradict Trump at the podium right after Trump says something? I love it when you ignore the questions asked, especially when we are questioning the efficacy of our elected leaders.

            Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s