thelogicofscience.com
I fail to see why it’s not helpful. People, even here, remain convinced Covid is no big deal. Contextualizing the numbers helps challenge that false assertion.
I had a prescription to get the chicken pox vaccination, not all places agreed to administer it because I was an adult. I finally found someone who would. They could shop around hospitals or somewhere to administer.From an article linked below: Ivermectin is used in humans to treat some parasitic worms, and there are topical (on the skin) formulations for head lice and skin conditions like rosacea. Ivermectin is not an anti-viral (a drug for treating viruses).
The patient was prescribed the drug by a doctor. Not, apparently, a good one, but a doctor none the less. The judge wasn't making a medical decision, merely allowing a patient to take a drug they had been prescribed.
I guess if a patient has two doctors with differing opinions, the patient is entitled to choose.
At least the patient is getting the human version. A lot of people are trying to buy the Ivermectin that is for horses.
Why You Should Not Use Ivermectin to Treat or Prevent COVID-19
Using the Drug ivermectin to treat COVID-19 can be dangerous and even lethal. The FDA has not approved the drug for that purpose.www.fda.gov
I thought it said they agreed the hospital would not be held liable.
My mom died of cervical cancer in her 40s - granted nothing was typical and yes not all are caused by HPV especially in the vaccines. I was disappointed when it was suggeted that women only go every 3 years for paps. Mine still does yearly. I'm also beyond the age (and was when the vaccine came out) they recommend. I am slightly disappointed there isn't more focus on paps and such. Check ups after menopause is needed too, but we tend to ignore. My kid has his first dose of HPV - pandemic delayed it on accident - will get 2nd this winter.
I don't dispute any of what you're saying; just noting that there are times when medical treatments have been court-ordered so I'm sure there is precedent for handling the issues you mention. I think it's most frequently done when the patient is incompetent to manage their own care, either because of mental impairment or where the patient is a minor and the parents disagree. I know it's happened with religious objections to treatments. That said, it's hard to figure out what happened in this case because very few facts have been made public.
I know there have been cases where there are fights about changing facilities and doctors. In those cases the patient is being transferred to someone else’s care and that person became responsible. This is a doctor being ordered not just to transfer or stop care, but administer a specific form of care with which they disagree and is not up to standards (and knowingly not providing the standard of care is illegal for most licensed professionals). That is all made worse because the treatment not only off-label but specifically and very publicly being disavowed by the FDA.
This is a more reasonable way to approach the problem at hand, IMO. If a hospital/its providers either aren’t capable of or refuse to provide a specific treatment, the patient/DPA should then either request a transfer or sign out AMA and “self transfer” to the new facility. Assuming you find such a receiving facility and your current hospital refuses transfer of care, that’s when attorneys and judges should get involved as you have a right to medical decisions for your own behalf (or where you have legal authority over someone). If all of the hospitals in your area refuse to admit an intubated COVID patient and administer ivermectin, perhaps that should tell you something. Certainly more than what the crackpot doc, your ambulance chaser attorney, and various talking heads have told you. I seem to remember a case of whether a young woman was “dead” some years back, and whether medical staff or the young woman’s parents had the final authority to withdraw care. But that’s different than essentially forcing a hospital/health system to abide by a non-admitting provider’s plan of care.
The easiest solution to this problem is to transfer care to another attending provider (of course, only possible if there is more than one hospitalist on duty). When there's some kind of personal conflict between doctor and patient, this happens fairly frequently.
No, it doesn’t. You’re leaving out important numbers and facts when dealing with service member deaths during a war. It’s hypocritical to dismiss comparisons of annual Covid deaths vs cancer or heart disease and then turn around and push the comparisons to the number of deaths during wars, especially when leaving out important information. Comparisons at this point are worthless.
If we're thinking of the same case, I believe that one was a dispute between the parents and the husband over who had the medical power of attorney. The medical staff, other than voicing their opinion, would have followed the directives of whoever had the decision rights, and I believe it was ultimately decided that this lay with the husband (as it usually does in such matters).
It's a scale question. People have problems with really big numbers. The comparison is to give the number scale and the size a context.
People have difficulty grasping big numbers. It’s hard to wrap your head around them. Comparing the numbers to something they already know is significant can help with that. How would you convey the scale of the pandemic to someone unable or unwilling to grasp it?
The judge ordered 30mg daily for 3 weeks but the doctor who prescribed it, has previously stated the typical treatment works out to 9 3mg daily for 4 days in hospitalized patients weighting 200Lbs.
I think you are thinking about two different cases.
If that were the case, one would have to have the numbers on people that served vs people that were deployed vs people in combat…on and on. There isn’t any context when simply saying more people have died from Covid than all US service members during warfare last century, especially when people don’t know what that number is, or even why that number is what it is. If you are knowledgeable about such things, you realize the post does a disservice to the severity of Covid, because deployed troops in WWI and WWII had a higher chance of dying (1-40) than someone infected with Covid does (1-61), and roughly the same as Covid in Viet Nam (1-58)
Except that the NFL example is confusing. Attendance varies by team. Are you saying people who attend a single game? The same people attending multiple games? Or attendance as a whole? What is that number? Is it the team with the most attendance or average attendance throughout the year? Preseason and postseason games included?
Since you asked for an answer to your questions:
It’s a far better example. Is it perfect? No. I never claimed it was. But it certainly has more of an impact. Most everyone knows what a full pro football stadium looks like. Multiply that over 8 games. Yeah…pretty clear.
People do love their football here.
