The Ballad of Gregory Rigano
On March 19th, in the early stages of the drastic efforts being taken at federal and state levels to mitigate the damage of a global pandemic, President Donald Trump delivered the good news about the anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine to the people of America.
“It’s a game changer,” he declared in a press conference at the James Brady Briefing Room. “It’s shown very encouraging — very, very encouraging early results. And we’re going to be able to make that drug available almost immediately. And that’s where the FDA has been so great. They — they’ve gone through the approval process; it’s been approved. And they did it — they took it down from many, many months to immediate. So we’re going to be able to make that drug available by prescription or states.”
As he sang hydroxychloroquine’s praises, Trump also preemptively downplayed any concerns about approving a drug for new treatments without testing. “The nice part” he said, “is it’s been around for a long time, so we know that if [sic] things don’t go as planned, it’s not going to kill anybody.”
As we all now know, of course, people can be killed by hydroxychloroquine. For one thing, it works by lowering your body’s immune system responses, making you more susceptible to other types of infections and diseases. Hydroxychloroquine can also cause cardiotoxicity, a condition which can create a fatal cardiac episode for the person taking it. And though this all may be relatively new information to us, it’s certainly not news to the medical community, who have known about these dangers for years.
As we also now know, a study funded by the University of Virginia and NIH released this week showed patients with COVID-19 had no benefit from hydroxychloroquine therapy. Indeed, patients who were given a treatment of hydroxychloroquine died at a higher rate than those who were not. It should be noted that this study, while the largest done on the effects of the anti-malaria drug on COVID-19 so far, is relatively small, and its authors conclude that further clinical trials are still needed. Still, the study is not exactly a ringing endorsement of a “game changer” that is “not going to kill anybody.”
It seems worth asking, then, why it is that the President of the United States thought that hydroxychloroquine was such a miracle cure, or why he was so sure it would have no adverse effects on patients that he encouraged its use without any clinical testing whatsoever.
Seriously, where did the President of the United States ever get such an idea?
*
On March 18th, the night before Trump made his pitch to doctors and the public to embrace an untested anti-malaria drug to combat the coronavirus, Fox News’s Tucker Carlson interviewed Gregory Rigano about the research Rigano had done in conjunction with Stanford University on hydroxychloroquine.
Rigano was clearly not used to being on camera, and it showed. However, for those watching, it was hard not to take him seriously. His resume, after all, was insanely impressive. In addition to his work with Stanford with the hydroxychloroquine study, Rigano was an advisor to their medical school’s research team. He was also the CEO of Jonas Research, the University of Colorado’s well-respected photovoltaics research group. He had a degree from SUNY in biochemistry, one from both Binghampton University and Universitat Autonomo de Barcelona in Global Finance, and a JD from Hofstra’s Maurice A. Deane Law School. And his hydroxychloroquine research team seemed no less impressive — “the most eminent infectious disease specialists in the world,” as he put it.
That morning at 5:00 am, Rigano announced, his team released a report showing that hydroxychloroquine was a cure for the coronavirus, one that boasted an astonishing 100% cure rate. He also put that law degree to some use, declaring that “the president has the authority to authorize the use of hydroxychloroquine immediately” without any further testing.
“I only know what you’re telling me,” replied Carlson prophetically, adding that “it’s our job to be skeptical… However, I very much want to believe this. The federal government needs to track down if this is true.”
“I’m so grateful,” Carlson added, “that you announced that on this show.”
* * *
The idea of using hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for COVID-19 is not an altogether outlandish one. The symptoms for malaria are, after all, not that different from the symptoms you get from a coronavirus. And hydroxychloroquine is used as a therapy treatment rather than a cure for the maladies for which it is prescribed, which also include lyme disease, rheumatism, and lupus. It was, in fact, one of the first treatments doctors in China used at the outset of their own outbreak, though it was quickly abandoned after a lack of results there.
Didier Raoult, a doctor in France, had the same thought the Chinese did. He believed his results were more promising, however, and on February 25th posted a video on Facebook encouraging the use of the anti-malaria drug. Raoult went on to attempt to publish his findings but had a hard time finding a reputable publisher, as his tests were not double blind, had no control group, and seemed to downplay the risks of adverse cardiac events the drug caused in some patients. Some doctors in Nigeria made similar claims and received similar criticisms as Raoult, but for the most part the idea of a hydroxychloroquine treatment for COVID-19 was considered a fringe idea, outside the thinking of the general public and elected officials alike.
The first time the thought of a hydroxychloroquine treatment really entered the general public’s conversation was March 16th, when famed billionaire and oddball Elon Musk tweeted his support for the idea. Musk linked an early draft of what appeared to be a study done in conjunction with Stanford Medical School that was inexplicably published on Google Docs. One of the listed authors of that study was Gregory Rigano, who, as a result of the attention from Musk, found himself on Tucker Carlson’s show just two days later to discuss his findings.
That interview appears to be the genesis of our country’s brief official foray into hydroxychloroquine. As has been widely reported, the President gets most of his news from television, and most of that is from Fox News. And on a day when Trump was looking for good news — any good news — to share with a nation racked with anxiety, Fox delivered in spades.
The president’s statements the next day mirrored completely everything Rigano had said on Carlson’s show: the fantastic results of the drug, the no-risk prospect of zero negative side effects, and his legal authority to demand wide-spread use without any testing whatsoever. Indeed, the only part of the interview that did not make it into the president’s comments was the part where Carlson — who seemed clearly unsure about the person he was interviewing after the interview was underway — said that “the federal government needs to track down if this is true.” Which is too bad, because the federal government really should have tracked down whether any of it was true or not.
Because as it turns out, Gregory Rigano was not at all who he claimed to be.
* * *
In retrospect, there were probably scores of reasons to question Rigano and his findings.
For one, he’s clearly pretty young, which makes the number of degrees he’s racked up seem somewhat unlikely. Then there is the fact that his degrees themselves seem oddly scattershot: biochemistry, medical research, international finance, law, and photovoltaics suggest a series of weird career changes, to stay the least. Then there is the fact that he seemed to list his official role at a state university research team as Chief Executive Officer, or for that matter, that he seemed to think that said team’s specialty — photovoltaics, the study of the production of electric current at the junction of two substances — was in any way related to epidemiology.
Also, he seems to always refer to himself as Gregory Rigano, Esquire. Which, I mean. Come on.
As it turns out, Rigano is in no way associated with Stanford University, and Stanford’s Medical School says that despite Rigano’s claims to the contrary, it had nothing to do with his so-called study. All of the other authors listed are indeed real researchers — but, like Stanford, they all claim to know nothing about Rigano or his study.
Rigano also appears to have nothing to do with Jonas Research, which, not surprisingly, does not have a CEO position. He does not appear to have degrees from any of the institutions he claims, nor does he appear to have been the founder of any of the various actual existing student organizations he claims to have founded on his LinkedIn page. To be clear: he might well have those degrees and be the founders for those organizations. But other than his LinkedIn page, there is a dearth of google-able records verifying or even referencing any of it.
As near as anyone can tell, before the coronavirus came along Rigano spent his time claiming to be a crypto currency expert to the stars, making the nebulously confusing claim to having provided “counsel to over $1 billion transaction volume at global scale.” Which maybe he did, maybe he didn’t. Rigano’s entire resume appears to be a list of incredible achievements that are either 100% provably bulls**t, or things you’ll just have to take on faith. In fact, as best I can tell, there is only one thing you can say with absolute certainty about Gregory Rigano’s career accomplishments:
He was patient zero in both the White House’s and the right-wing media’s weeks-long political push to use an untested, potentially unsafe drug without any kind of testing or research whatsoever.
* * *
The story of hydroxychloroquine as a possible treatment for COVID-19 is still being written. It seems certain now that the claims of it being a “game changing” miracle cure with zero negative side effects will not be borne out, but it may yet prove to be useful for some patients in some circumstances. It will be months, or years, or possibly even never before we know for sure, because unfortunately that’s how stuff like this works.
But that doesn’t mean there aren’t still lessons to be learned from hydroxychloroquine. And the biggest lesson by far is who to trust, and who not to trust, in this time of change and strife.
Epidemiologists, like Dr. Fauci, were pretty upfront from the start that it was way too soon to know any of what was being reported to be “proven.” It wasn’t the news we wanted to hear, but it ended up being both correct and prudent. If anything, I would argue their lack of telling us what we wanted to hear should make us want to listen to them more carefully in the future. Others, of course, we should learn to listen to less.
That Carlson interview? It’s still up on their website, with no corrections or updates. At least as of today, it’s still being shared by people I know on Facebook as proof that Dr. Fauci is lying to us for some unknown nefarious reason.
Laura Ingraham actually had Rigano on her show two days prior to Carlson. But no one at Fox News, in the time between those two appearances, bothered to do any fact checking about Rigano or his claims at all. Ingraham even famously made a very public trip to the White House to demand the president make hydroxychloroquine treatment the medicinal law of the land. The day after he appeared on Carlson’s show, Fox Business’s Stuart Varney not only featured Rigano, he claimed that Rigano was a doctor – one of the few things Rigano himself has never claimed to be but which, presumably, Varney thought would add some gravitas.
And on the subject of doctors, we should all remember that despite actual epidemiologists encouraging caution about hydroxychloroquine as a miracle cure, almost every so-called “doctor” with a TV show or talk radio show — Dr. Oz, Dr. Phil, Dr. Drew, Dr. Laura — pushed it hard, and used the fact that they used “Dr.” as part of their stage name as reason to take them more seriously than the epidemiologists. Same with pretty much every other conservative talk show host that didn’t have the word “Dr” in their stage name.
And finally, of course, there is the president himself, who let himself get flimflammed the way he seemingly always does: by assuming someone whose only skill is self-promotion knows more about complex topics than do the people who actually study s**t. Rudy, Cohen, Manafort, Pirro, McEnany, Hannity, Diamond & Silk, Alex Jones, Stone, the Labradoodle guy, Lawrence Van Dyke, The Mooch. Trump clearly has a soft spot for those who have no real interest in brushing up on anything past their own self-promotion.
Really, Gregory Rigano is no different from any of those other clown-show grifters. But at the end of the day, he may end up being the one with the biggest body count.
As I said, the story of hydroxychloroquine is still being written.
This Administration makes me feel like we are living in a scene out of Huckleberry Finn, or the Music Man, or Elmer Gantry, or any other description of the dark underbelly of our society where people have unbounded gullibility and credulousness and are the perfect prey of con men and charlatans.Report
Trump and by extension his allies need a quick and easy magical fix out of the Covid-19 pandemic. Anything longer than that challenges their ideology too much and goes beyond their patience.Report
His pick of schools is interesting. SUNY Binghamton is the flagship SUNY but still largely a second tier university. Not a mill but not a Cal, Michigan, William and Mary, or Virginia. Hofstra is a tier two or three law school in suburban New York. Not the worse school but there are many other superiors ones to it in the area. So it is not the obvious bullshit if he tried to present himself as a Harvard graduate with a Rhodes scholarship. He very well could have gone to those schools. Perhaps he had a hard time landing a job after law school or any level of graduation and just needed to branch on to anything to make his fortune. First it was crypto and now the useless drug for COVID.
All of this gets aided by the fact that American politics has serious cases of people with Oppositional Defiant Disorder who rush in to defend charlatans just because libs are denouncing them.
And this was all before Trump began urging people to inject disinfection. I can predict who is going to “well actually” this story even though the makers of Lysol and Detterol felt the need to release statements against injection of their products. But hey, doing anything besides “well actually” means agreeing with libs and you can’t have that right.Report
The defense seems to be that the President was merely babbling incoherently, and its unfair to extract a clear meaning from his gibberish.Report
Some defense.Report
It’s moved onto “The President was being sarcastic” which is some ballsy gaslighting.
Meanwhile, conservatives in general are going with “The President was really talking about [insert cutting edge cancer treatment about UV light] or [insert light therapy for closing wounds] or insert [chemo therapy is basically poisoning yourself slowly], so he’s really just synthesizing all these cutting edge treatments and asking for outside the box thinking!”.
Which is just so sad. He wasn’t. His conception of the virus and it’s effect on the human body is equivalent to a stain on a counter. He was told sunlight or disinfectants could kill it , so he just openly wondered why no one had thought to wipe down someone’s lungs, and then said “Look into that”.
He doesn’t understand cells. Or viruses. He does understand germs on surfaces — he’s a big germaphobe, which isn’t a bad thing to be right now. So that’s it. That’s the President. Briefed by the best people in the world, has the CDC on call, and he’s openly wondering why doctor’s haven’t tried giving someone’s lungs a good scrub, or injecting some lysol right into the problem since it kills the viruses.
That’s the world we live in. That’s a President with 43.4% support. A man so dumb he openly wondered why we don’t bleach the lungs of people in the ICU.Report
and people are doing it. I saw a short story on one of the aggregators that authorities in Maryland had fielded 100 or calls within 24 hours of his remarks about people wanting to know what disinfectants and how much to dose.Report
Well, and I am deeply disturbed to find this out, bleach enemas are a thing.
A supposed cure to autism.
As one might expect, the results start with “horrific and torturous” into move right into “lethal”. Shredded intestinal lining, internal chemical burns, all the stuff any person who has so much as gotten a whiff of bleach when opening a bottle could predict.Report
And in a classic “Trump bites man” story, Breitbart got out front of the disinformation campaign by arguing that Trump never said what he in fact said only to be undercut by Trump himself, who admitted he said it but only meant it sarcastically.Report
In all the essays and histories I’ve read about the reign of Stalin, there is a common refrain about how there is that instant when the party line switches, and every peasant has a terrible moment, wondering exactly when it will be safe to discard yesterday’s truth and embrace today’s, but not too warm of an embrace and not too quickly, for fear that tomorrow’s truth will mark him as a traitor.Report
The New York Times managed to both sides the disinfectant injections: https://www.lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2020/04/does-mainlining-clorox-carry-significant-health-benefits-views-differReport
Every day my respect for the NYT and WaPo go down because of sh!t like this. And yet they are still orders of magnitude ahead of other outlets in terms of actual New Reporting.Report
Sad but true.Report
You need to stop outsourcing your critical thinking to Scott Lemieux, because he’s really not very good at it. Here’s the tweet:
The phrase “dangerously, in the view of some experts” modifies “President Trump theorized.” That is, some experts say that it was dangerous for Trump to say what he said. Nothing in this sentence suggests any controversy over the safety or efficacy of bleach injections.
The New York Times has been pretty aggressively flushing its credibility down the toilet in the past few years, but this isn’t really an example of such.
Anyway, let me know if you need help diagramming any other sentences.Report
Who are the experts who are just fine with Trump’s theorizing?Report
I guess we have the answer to that question, not that one needs to be provided.Report
Saw this, thought it apt:
What I’m worried about is “what if there ain’t no miracle cure?”
Like, off-brand drugs don’t help.
Ventilators don’t help.
The only things that help are masks and handwashing and they only delay the inevitable.
Then what?Report
Then we learn how to live with this thing short term and we ramp up a vaccine development program.
And we make sure both sides elect a better administration next time.Report
I’ve seen a number of arguments over the number of successful coronavirus vaccines we’ve discovered.
It seems like the people who argue that there has never been a successful coronavirus vaccine are overstating things, it seems like they’re using a baseline such as the poliovirus vaccine’s success rather than the success of the flu shot… which is successful using a very different baseline.
I saw a little chart that showed the benefits of wearing a mask versus the other guy wearing a mask versus both people wearing masks and, yeah, it’s great to see percentages of percentages… and if a SARS2 Vaccine turns that into percentages of percentages of percentages, that’s even better.
But the WHO (among others) argued for a while that “masks don’t really work” using a particular baseline.
And seeing that baseline of “success” constantly move doesn’t give me confidence.Report
That’s how science works. We start with the hypothesis, test it, then revise and test again then develop a new hypothesis and so on. 99% of the time its done hidden away from society in labs and universities and such so the messy sausage making isn’t visible, only the final product. But its still more or less this way none the less.
Good news is we are a LOT better at the process, and it takes a lot less time. Jonas Saulk took started working on a polio vaccine in 1948 that he didn’t announce until 4 years later which then took another 2 years to develop and implement, The oral polio vaccine took 6 years after that.
If current work holds we will likely go from no coronavirus vaccine to full approved vaccine in 18 months. Call me old fashioned but that’s really good.
Meanwhile interim measures like masks will go though an evolution of “success.” Just don’t confuse that with lacking knowledge or something you shouldn’t have confidence in. You need to get in the habit of having more confidence because it means really smart people are working hard to get to a better answer.Report
“If current work holds we will likely go from no coronavirus vaccine to full approved vaccine in 18 months.”
And if we put nine women on the job we’ll have a baby in one month.Report
I know plenty of smart people. Like, up close. I’m not sure how much confidence that ought to give me.
When it comes to “full approved vaccine”, I’d kinda like to know what that means for the vaccine itself. If I understand the virality of this particular virus, it’s that each person who gets it is likely to infect 3 other people. Vox, of all places, had an amazing visualization of this sort of thing.
If the vaccine works as well as social distancing? I’m on board.
If it works as well as the flu shot?
Well, then we’re talking about changing 3 to 2.
Which is good! It’s part of a complete breakfast!
But it also means that things are never going back to the way they used to be.Report
At a first order approval will mean it meets some defined level of efficacy – as in XX% of the population has immunity for YY period of time following innoculation. It also means it has minimal side effects and we know what they are and can recommend mitigation.Report
If X is 2, that’s one thing. If it’s 5, that’s another.
I’m hoping 7 isn’t too much to hope for.
And the whole issue of whether YY is measured in months rather than years.
Edit: in the last minute, this came across my timeline:
Report
Well, its kinda like any other virus throughout time immemorial. We develop a herd immunity as people get sick, don’t die and we move on. But, a positive attitude and good cleanliness are certainly good. Staying out of cities and big crowed events wont hurt. Driving a car and living in the suburbs, good. Telecommuting. Recognizing the actual dangers (old people and the very sick) while not hindering the least likely cases (children, the young and healthy.) Using logic to keep things going, and not fear to shut things down. Making sure the rest of the people have enough food to eat and good exercise to stay healthy.
Panic and hate? Not helping.Report
Well, one thing that keeps bubbling up but also seems to be stomped down quickly is that the overwhelming majority of people who have died from the virus so far have had co-morbidities.
And then I think “if I wanted a disease that would attack rich people in poor countries and poor people in rich countries and pretty much devastate any service-based economy…”
Well, I’d want a disease that attacked fat people and the elderly and people with Blood-Type A.Report
What would you expect from Trump? He is a charlatan that inherited dad’s money and company. He is deeply lazy and stupid. He wants to be a mafia don. His own gift is for being a carnival barker and bullshit and he has finally run into a problem that he can’t back out of by spewing bullshit and being a carnival barker.
We are not going to be on lockdown forever but yes, COVID might become endemic instead of pandemic and we might have COVID season. The 1918 pandemic’s cautionary measures lasted about two years. The 1920s were not known for social distancing.Report
Well, you know what people who just say the first thing that flits into their head are like.Report
Yes, he does.Report
Jaybird,
This is just embarrassing yourself. Do I like quarantine? No. It takes away everything good about living in a city. I miss being able to go out for food on a whim or a drink or a morning coffee. Taking a walk to the local book store to browse the stacks. I miss seeing movies and concerts. Meeting with friends. Being able to walk without minding if I am six feet apart.
But the virus is serious and so is the pandemic. There is no change of opinion. It is only you who sees it because you gotta play gotcha.Report
I know you don’t like quarantine, Saul. Quarantines *SUCK*.
I wouldn’t assume that anybody liked them.Report
Everybody forgot that “flattening the curve” wasn’t about changing the total number of cases.Report
I don’t know. I’ve written and deleted about five responses as being “too dark,” but I admit there are days that I wonder if we’re witnessing the beginning of the extinction of the human race.Report
It’s just the next step in the evolution.Report
Humans have survived far worse then this. And this sucks. It may suck for years and we are certainly just in the beginning. But we got this. This isn’t WW1 and a world wide flu pandemic. This isn’t bubonic plague or something like that. And this is bad enough. People survived living in dictatorships for decades and came out at the end. This isn’t that. Despite the silly protesters and such most people are always better at hanging together, being strong and surviving.Report
This is very true, and we should remember that.
I think we Americans who came of age in the second half of the 20th century just don’t have the experience of something like this, where there aren’t any easy answers.
Its entirely possible that the virus will become a long term crippling drag on our lives and economy, and our lives, the lives of our children will be poorer than they were until recently.
We will certainly survive, but its possible that Americans will need to grow accustomed to the difficult lives that other people have always known.Report
A few days ago,a 100-year-old man named Philip Kahn died on Long Island of COVID-19 complications. He was alert and had been talking at length about our shameful lack of preparedness. He had his reasons.
He lost his twin brother to the 1918-19 Spanish Flu pandemic, and noted the irony of his situation in his last days.Report
Great article my Todd! Great to see you about as well!Report
Thanks North! Hope you and the fam are doing well.Report
This is an excellent write-up!Report
thanks!Report
Hearing this guys claims of degrees sounds like how 10 year olds talk about being an adult when they are playing. “First i’ll become a SEAL then a fighter pilot for while then a doctor!!.” His boasting really should have been a clue to anyone with a basic knowledge of higher ed and careers.
This is truly the Age of the Grifter. I’ve been told so many times by clients of mine that the other party ( their ex wife/husband) is such a good liar that i really have to watch out. They are so afraid i’ll be conned by their expert liar ex. In almost every case their ex came off like a really bad liar or said the same thing about them. And both were right. Ugh.Report
We’ve done quite well at sucking all the hope out of life, and people are so desperate to get it back that they’ll give all their money to someone who promises it to them.Report
I hadn’t noticed all hope being sucked out of life. But that is just me. Sure this time sucks and blows. But the grifters have been doing pretty well for years now so it isn’t just this moment. Quick fix miracles almost always leave you poorer in the long run. Usually in the short run to.Report
After telling people that love is exploitation, that working just means you’re working for the man, that no matter what you do you’ll always be a racist, that we’re all going to die from the climate change caused by old people…what hope is left? Why be good, why do anything, why strive, why try?
And along comes someone who says “give me ten bucks and I promise things will be better tomorrow”. You’re surprised that’s happening more, now? You’re surprised that it works so much better now than it did before?Report
Who said this and why did you believe them? Did you? I don’t believe any of those things myself. There is hope all over the place. Gosh knows i look for it and want it especially in dark times. In fact i don’t even think most people, even liberals/D’s believe those things. You can find climate fatalists but they are wrong and are generally derided. People seem to find a lot of hope in religion, so good for them. Not me, but it seems good for them. It seems like you are picking the harshest statements of people you disagree with and taking them as some truth everybody must believe. That makes no sense.
If people fall for grifters that is ultimately on them. I usually feel for them since many pro grifters are good at it and know how to play on people. But it’s still on them to learn and listen and sometimes bad things happen to good people. That sucks and it’s also why i dislike grifters/liars/ cheats so much since they prey on peoples weaknesses and fears. We all have fears and vulnerable times. Those that prey on people at those times are bad people and i dont’ have much sympathy for them. They know what they are doing.Report
See this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_-P9_oUV9Gw
That video is about the response to a video game, but I think the point generalizes. It is fake outrage.
DD is upset not at what the left believes, but what he has been told the left believes, told by those who want men like him angry and unsatisfied. It comes from reading Brietbart or watching Fox (or various similar outlets). It is deliberate and calculated.
On the latter point, after the whole “gamergate” debacle, a series of emails were leaked from Brietbart that revealed how they directly perceived the usefulness of “white dude grievances” and how these could be manipulated toward right wing goals. This strategy has been in play for a while. It is clearly very effective.Report
Very true. Not just the fake outrage and what people are told the left believes but that excuses and validates any reaction.
I’ve listened to about 11 minutes of that vid. Epic example of this. Crimany. Gamers are really something.Report
Hey! I play video games!
You’re oppressing me.Report
I had a Pong home console game so i am the most OG of all OG gamers ever. So i think i know about being oppressed for being a gamer.
Watched the rest of that vid. Very good stuff. Dude really knows what he is doing.Report
Got me beat, I didn’t play any sort of video games until 1974 when my undergraduate school got a PLATO terminal. OTOH, it supported MMOGs (for sufficiently small values of massive).Report
Out of curiosity, what types of M*MOGs did you have back then? Are you talking about early MUDs, or something else?Report
There was at least one dungeon crawl, and a free-for-all aerial dogfight. The first semester killer game was Empire: conquer the (very small) galaxy by tending to your planets’ economies, invading your neighbors, etc. Hideously limited in numbers of players, the game state didn’t persist across reboots, standard miserable PLATO IV graphics (512×512 monochrome bitmap). The games were all written by students, so the code never progressed beyond “mostly works.” Empire was written by some guy at the University of Iowa or Iowa State, I think. Still, students would queue up in the basement of the CS building all night to get their one-hour time slot.
I was just starting to be a part-time futurist at the time (without knowing what that was). Empire was the first time I remember thinking something like “Imagine this only with a thousand times the bandwidth and a million times the computing power…”Report
“DD is upset not at what the left believes, but what he has been told the left believes, told by those…”
hey remember all those conversations you had with LeeEsq, where he said he was sad that nobody wanted to date him, and you told him that he probably deserved it?
I’m upset at what the left believes because you’re my example of what the left believes.Report
It’s kind of bullshit to bring Lee into this when he didn’t ask for it. But whatever.
I’ve said many thing to him over the years. Here’s the short version: there are aspects to his situation that aren’t his fault. There are, however, many that are his fault. In any case, his circumstance doesn’t justify any broad resentment toward women.
You can try to summarize that as “he probably deserved it,” but it’s way more complicated than that.
That said, I do think that a lot of contemporary right wing thinking is generated by sexually resentful men.Report
“It’s kind of bullshit to bring Lee into this when he didn’t ask for it.”
haw
“no fair to bring him into this! I will proceed to talk about him for two more paragraphs.”
Also, you ask why I think what I think, and I tell you, and then you tell me that I’m wrong to think that. And then you cry about people gaslighting you.Report
That video is about the response to a video game, but I think the point generalizes. It is fake outrage.
We’ve been over this before. Here’s the original piece. The author kind of dances around it, and avoids explicitly saying “Cuphead is racist,” but there’s a clear insinuation that the creators of Cuphead did something wrong by emulating the style of 1930s cartoons without putting in the Social Justice™ messages needed to ritually purify it.
Here’s former Ordinary Gentleman Ethan Gach reinforcing that message with a steaming pile of Kotaku.
You can say it was blown out of proportion, sure. It’s the Internet. Everything gets blown out of proportion, and not just by people you don’t like. But it would be super cool if you could stop gaslighting by saying it was made up out of whole cloth.Report
so I told you, and your response was to yell at me for being such a downer and then yell further that anyone who gets scammed should have known better, so, i guess that’s my answerReport
No yelling/CAPS at all. I asked why you believe all these things you said you were told. I can get where some of them come from but sort of vaguely and I don’t know why you believe them or they are the reason you feel the way you do.
Tell me, why do you believe these things that affect your life poorly.Report
It has to be somebody’s fault?Report
“Tell me, why do you believe these things that affect your life poorly. [sic]”
Never said I did. It’s not about what I believe.
Please read my comments instead of npcmemeing.Report
That’s the most pessimistic – and most not reality – comment I think I’ve ever seen you write. And you write some really not real stuff.
And though I will regret this – why do you say that?Report
And you write some really not real stuff.
Careful with that stone, champ. It’d be a real shame if something happened to that beautiful glass house of yours.Report
I have no glass house. and given the boulders that get hurled at me around here regularly I have no illusions that I should.Report
Vermin Supreme weighs in:
Report
It’s worth pointing out here that the UV light thing is an actual proposed treatment under development.Report
Many of the Trump supporting punditry tried to sell hydroxychloroquine as a prophylactic in that one could take the drug to prevent being infected. It is clear that President Trump believed this. Those drugs wanted it to be protective so that there would be no lockdowns and so Covi19 reponse would not hurt the economy. Remember the rumors that physicians were prescribing it for their families.
Then hydroxychloroquin went through a phase when it was given to inpatients in intensive care but was being paired with zinc and azithromycin. Of course this caused shortage of the antibiotic, azithromycin, and zinc. At some places, hydroxychloroquine was also paired with Vitamin C as part of the medical cocktail.
What the media has been bad at reporting is that there is an unofficial playbook for viral outbreaks when there is no vaccine or effective treatment. The playbook includes using drugs off label, speeding up producing of experimental drugs, and finding old drugs that might work. Also, using antibodies from recovered patients is part of the plan.
This was all done during the Ebola outbreaks in Africa but most Americans did not pay attention. to include anti-viral drugs, experimental vaccines, and antibodies from recovered patients.
If one is paying attention, remdesivir and monoclonal antibodies like (sarilumab are next in cycle and some Fox pundit will be overselling them just like hydroxychloroquin.Report
Related but everything about this story is obvious: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/apr/24/revealed-leader-group-peddling-bleach-cure-lobbied-trump-coronavirusReport
Harmonizing with @superdestroyer above, mass media has ALWAYS done a bad job of reporting on and explaining science.
Single studies are constantly presented with big splashes of attention that this or that food or drug has just been found to be a cure for this or that disease, condition, or malady. In fact, the studies typically only indicate some suggestion that there is some quantum of beneficial effect and typically have not yet made it through double-blind independent-party verification, much less governmental certification and approval (if applicable).
Thus it has been since at least the 1970s, and I simply have no living memory going back further than that to speak to earlier times but little reason to suspect they were any different then.
Add to that the deeply-baked-in hucksterism inherent in right wing media, evidenced by not only its breathlessly partisan reporting, and portrayal of commentary as news, but more importantly the actual commercial sold for broadcast to the audience — miracle cures have been staples of their commercial content and therefore the financial lifeblood of FOX News from its very beginning in the mid-90s.
This metastasized in the Trump political campaign, a veritable traveling feast of massive rallies where there is A LOT of stuff being sold, everything from the trademark red cap to flags to t-shirts to, you guessed it, allegedly medicinal products of questionable provenance and dubious efficacy. The substantive content of a Trump rally is a steady flow of distilled salesmanship, emotional manipulation, exaggeration and shading of truth, and sometimes outright falsities.
The only thing to really wonder about hydroxychloroquine is whether someone in the Trump family somehow had a financial stake in an entity that manufactured and stood to make a ton of money selling the stuff. What they really wanted to sell was a placebo, and I can only hope they thought it would be as harmless as a placebo rather than, as we now know, actually dangerous to a significant portion of the population.
In a way, it’s the Trump Administration in microcosm: based upon nothing more than sales talk from a spokesperson who is much less than he represents himself to be, a gravely serious and complex problem is assigned false but simple and fast seeming solution, which is then touted relentlessly by the President of the United States and everyone politically, physically, or financially near him — to be sold at a profit and to somewhere between actual harm and no effect whatsoever.Report
You forgot to add the people who might not like the right-wing hucksterism and think Trump is wrong for promoting this but like to exhibit Oppositional Defiant Disorder whenever a Democrat or liberal states a belief.Report
“When I joined the Calling Out Bullshit Party, I never thought that my bullshit would get called out!”
Trump and his supporters say a lot of incredibly stupid things. That doesn’t mean that you and your fellow travellers deserve a pass on the incredibly stupid things you say.Report
In an interesting turn of events, the New York Times is telling men to inject female hormones to cure COVID-19:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/27/health/coronavirus-estrogen-men.html
I mean, yeah, they’re just saying that there’s some evidence that it may be helpful, but the new consensus among Right-Thinking People seems to be that it’s totally reasonable to characterize this as telling people to do it themselves.Report
Is there evidence that mainlining Lysol might be helpful?Report
It’s effective when stacked with DNP.Report
Brandon,
Where does the article tell men to do this?
Being in a fitness subculture where self-medication of hormones is openly encouraged, I’ve probably forgotten more media sources on that subject than “Right Thinking” people will see outside of this in their entire lives unless they themselves are exposed to the same interests.
That informs my idea on what encouraging self-medication looks like. Compared to that, the NYT article doesn’t even come close, but I don’t expect clear thinking from “Right Thinking” people when it comes to the NYT or any other left-leaning media for reasons that have been obvious for the 30 years I’ve been aware of this kind of BS.
Saying something can work doesn’t mean people should just go out and do it. I don’t care if it’s progesterone, estrogen, testosterone, hydrochloroquine or aspirin.Report
As an aside, Julia Serano has some thoughts on this: https://twitter.com/JuliaSerano/status/1254829702289620992
tl;dr — antiandrogens might actually be better, and it’s kinda weird that “everyone” is is focussed on estrogen/progesterone rather than antiandrogens.
For purely selfish reasons, I hope the gender differences are hormone related rather than genetic, given that I have female-typical hormones and (I’m guessing) male genetics. (I’ve never had my genes tested, but it seems almost certain.)
This is assuming the gender differences in covid-19 are physical rather than behavioral. There remains so much we don’t know about how this disease works.
In any case, the right-wing response to this is borderline pathological.Report
Dave:
They’re not. I’m just making fun of the “tRUmP TolD PeoPle To InjEct lySOl” meme. The thing he actually said was stupid enough; people don’t need to lie about it.Report