|
Replies: 25
| visibility 578
|
110%er [7159]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Politics of WHO ventilators for COVID patients: They lied.
3
2
Jun 7, 2023, 6:05 PM
|
|
The Great COVID Death Coverup - Global ResearchGlobal Research - Centre for Research on Globalization
Trust the government.
Follow the science.
Health care agencies and hospitals exist for the sole purpose of improving the lives of people.
Baloney.
With regard to the politics of COVID 19 and the health authorities & hospitals recommendations about use of ventilators to help patients to survive COVID 19 infection, the World Health Organization (WHO) adoption of P.R.China’s ventilator practice was not intended to benefit the patients. It was all about limiting the spread of COVID 19 from patients to health care workers.
Their insistence that use of ventilators was to improve the health outcomes for those suffering from COVID 19 infection was a bald faced lie.
https://www.globalresearch.ca/great-covid-death-coverup/5821638 The Great COVID Death Coverup - Global Research All Global Research articles can be read in 51 languages by activating the Translate Website button below the author’s name. To receive Global Research’s Daily Newsletter (selected articles), click here. Click the share button above to email/forward this article to your friends and colleagues. Follow us on Instagram and Twitter and subscribe to our Telegram Channel. Feel free to repost and share …
|
|
|
|
 |
Oculus Spirit [81925]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47121
Joined: 3/18/07
|
######## article by a ######## artist.***
Jun 7, 2023, 6:21 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7159]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: ######## article by a ######## artist.***
Jun 7, 2023, 6:58 PM
|
|
If you object to my omission that hospitals had also put COVID patients on ventilators because of the high reimbursement rate to hospitals when ventilators got used, then my apologies. Hospitals were more than eager to snooker insurance providers and Medicare by deploying ventilators even when their use was not warranted.
Heck, you also had another valid criticism of my post when I failed to remind everyone of the health industy’s scam to capture the easy-to-get insurance company & Medicare reimbursements by categorizing deaths from both flu and COVID as being all COVID deaths.
In NYC during Nov & Dec 2020, reported flu deaths went to zero. Yes, zero. COVID deaths were plentiful, though. Either the NYC health provider agencies were scamming the reimbursement system, or COVID 19 is the most effective anti flu treatment in the history of mankind.
Waddyathink?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81925]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47121
Joined: 3/18/07
|
Talk about a tone deaf and completely insensitive argument.***
Jun 7, 2023, 7:04 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97750]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64883
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Covid behaved differently than any other known "respiratory"
4
Jun 7, 2023, 7:44 PM
|
|
virus. One of the early problems hospitals had was with ventilating patients, and administering o2. For some reason, covid patients were walking into hospitals, talking with doctors and ER staff, only to learn their o2 was in the 70's or 60's. At these levels, with ANYTHING other than covid, they would be gasping for air, or unconscious. Yet people were walking, talking, and feeling relatively "fine" with o2 levels that, with influenza or anything else, would have rendered them unconscious.
Early on, in China, they administered o2 to anyone with an o2 below 90. And vents occurred when the o2 levels were 80 or below. But people were WALKING in with o2 levels below 80, feeling maybe a little short of breath. Once you're short of breath with covid, most were already critical.
It's called silent hypoxia. This is usually not seen with respiratory viruses. It is seen sometimes with altitude sickness. But the fact is the hospitals didn't know any better. When I got covid my 02 went down to 87. I felt no shortness of breath, and only had a mild cough. But that o2, had I have gone to the ER, would have meant I would have been admitted, and given o2, and who knows what else. If it went into the low 80's I was going to the ER. It never got less than 87. But I had double pneumonia once with influenza, was panting like I was running while laying down still, and gasping for air. My o2 was 89 then. So covid is different, and they learned. This is why I purchased a home o2 meter early in 2020.
They can save lives with covid.
Here, read up from something that's not a nutjob website.
https://www.bu.edu/articles/2020/3-reasons-why-covid-19-can-cause-silent-hypoxia/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7397783/ Why COVID-19 Silent Hypoxemia Is Baffling to Physicians Patients with coronavirus disease (COVID-19) are described as exhibiting oxygen levels incompatible with life without dyspnea. The pairing—dubbed happy hypoxia but more precisely termed silent hypoxemia—is especially bewildering to physicians ...
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9200195/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Covid behaved differently than any other known "respiratory"
1
Jun 7, 2023, 7:52 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97750]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64883
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Well, I would have literally never known my o2 was 87
1
Jun 7, 2023, 7:59 PM
|
|
if I hadn't tested. I had a mild cough, just felt like a cold. Stuffy, whatever. But that's the same level o2 I had with double pneumonia once with a 105 fever, and back then I was gasping for air and panting. It's weird, but then again I knew it would be.
This was a learning curve hospitals had all over the world. In hospitals in Italy, China, Brazil, South Africa, Australia, UK, Germany, France, you name it, the number of people presenting with few or ZERO symptoms with o2 in the 80's or less, was unheard of. Am I to believe they were all bilking insurance companies? Lol, even in countries with socialized medicine, I guess they were bilking the government. No, they were following SOP with a virus that doesn't follow SOP.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [54]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 35
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: Well, I would have literally never known my o2 was 87
Jun 7, 2023, 8:07 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7159]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: Covid behaved differently than any other known "respiratory"
Jun 7, 2023, 10:07 PM
[ in reply to Covid behaved differently than any other known "respiratory" ] |
|
Thanks much for these two articles from Aug. and Oct. 2020.
Very helpful as far as explaining COVID caused hypoxia and details about the nature of lung damage and the peculiar responses from the COVID stricken lungs re capillary dilation or lack thereof.
Not criticizing the articles or your perspectives, so I hope that my next comments don’t offend you (or anyone else):
Neither article touched on the unusually high rate of secondary bacterial pneumonia infections (I.e., a whopping 57%) associated with the use of ventilators on COVID patients. For reference, secondary bacterial pneumonia associated with the use of ventilators for other (non bacterial) forms of pneumonia. (To be fair, COVID patients were statistically more likely to remain on ventilators for meaningfully longer periods of time than those patients whose original condition was a non-bacterial form of pneumonia.)
Neither article provided any background as to why WHO came out guns blazing with recommending ventilators, nor about the influence of P.R.Chinese medical authorities reasons for recommending ventilators but apparently (I have no reference for this next part of my statement other than the absence of mention) nothing about the merits of less invasive measures such as high flow cannula, CPAP, and BiPAP to increase O2 uptake.
Excerpt from an interview with Dr. Amesh Adalja, a senior scholar at the Johns Hopkins University Center for Health Security:
“Adalja said in an email that mechanical ventilation was "likely overused, to some degree, early in the pandemic before medical professionals had data showing they could use high flow nasal cannulas and non-invasive ventilation such as CPAP and BiPAP machines."
Back to my perspectives.
Even your “The Brink” article from Oct. 2020 suggested non-invasive tactics such as supplemental O2 or ‘body flipping / turning over in bed’ as candidate Al
Yet the FDA continued to loudly promote use of ventilators, while being less vocal about non-invasive means of improving O2 levels in the blood.
We all know that the USA bought a bazillion ventilators to fight COVID. Those who pay attention to the politics of the federal bureaucracies also know that they don’t want to be second-guessed when they turn out to be wrong; being accused of endorsing the excessive purchase of not much needed equipment. (Not blaming the FDA for supporting the large purchases of ventilators back in H1-2020. My complaint is that rather than admitting less invasive means raising O2 levels were better than ventilators, they chose the ‘we were, and still are, right’ about ventilators as the preferred path.)
When / if you find sources to refute the assertions from my “nut job website” about the WHO being motivated to push ventilators with a primary goal of protecting hospital workers vs optimizing patient care, then that would be great.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [97750]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 64883
Joined: 7/13/02
|
Covid damages the immune system. That's the answer
3
Jun 8, 2023, 2:55 AM
|
|
to your question. It damages your immune system while you are infected and for months afterwards. This increases infection risks from any invasive procedure. They actually recommend delaying elective surgeries for 4-10 weeks after a covid infection for this reason. They also pulled back on using ventilators for this reason as well.
There is an increased risk of infection if you're vented with covid, or have any invasive procedure during or afterwards. Or if you get a cut or whatever. This is the main reason they pulled back using vents. This level of immune damage doesn't exist, or is much less pronounced with other viruses. So as we went into the pandemic, hospitals kept using standard practices until they learned. And they learned intubation should be the very last resort because of this higher risk of secondary infections.
It's not some vast government conspiracy. This happened the world over as every hospital in every country had to adapt to treating covid. Everyone rushed to vent patients as they would with anyone previously. And every hospital learned to hold back until the patient is at deaths door because the rate of secondary infections were so elevated that ventilation should be a last resort.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7159]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: Covid damages the immune system. That's the answer
Jun 8, 2023, 1:35 PM
|
|
Thanks for the additional perspectives.
Before the end of 2020, the worse net patient outcomes from use of ventilators vs use of noninvasive methods of combatting hypoxia was widely reported in medical literature.
Why then was the medical community (driven in part by guidance from the FDA and other health organizations) still focused on ventilators in first half of 2021?
Considering that COVID 19 was the biggest human medical crises since the Spanish flu, it is inconceivable that the medical community wouldn’t pick up on this sooner.
Stupidity? Of course not.
Laziness / insufficient interest in continuing education? More likely.
Corruption (business priorities > medical practice)? If it quacks like a duck …
I’m not suggesting that the medical community is replete with Josef Mengele types, but I am suggesting that in juggling medically optimal practices vs business interests, undesirable compromises have been made.
Thanks again.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [34600]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 41424
Joined: 4/20/01
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7159]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: YOU ARE SO INSENSITIFF!!***
1
Jun 7, 2023, 11:04 PM
|
|
I don’t think that he understood anything that was posted in the entire thread.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [81925]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 47121
Joined: 3/18/07
|
Lol, just like you understood wastewater, you’re simply a
1
Jun 8, 2023, 8:06 AM
|
|
regurgitator of misinformation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12165]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17895
Joined: 5/16/00
|
With all due respect
6
6
Jun 8, 2023, 8:51 AM
[ in reply to Re: ######## article by a ######## artist.*** ] |
|
stay in your lane if you have no idea what you are talking about
MD's especially ICU attendings and pulmonologists know the trauma that ventilating a patient can have on lungs. To suggest they would do that as a whole just for higher reimbursement, inane doesn't begin to describe that argument. It is insulting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lot o points [155976]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 65843
Joined: 5/6/13
|
Re: With all due respect
2
Jun 8, 2023, 9:48 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7159]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: With all due respect, please read more carefully
1
Jun 8, 2023, 1:20 PM
[ in reply to With all due respect ] |
|
With all due respect, if you are an MD as your TNet name implies, then your physician training didn’t teach you thorough reading skills. Either that, or you have decided to ignore the thesis of posts and launch a defective counter argument in hopes of appearing to be virtuous. I believe that being careless is better than being specious. Therefore, I’ll help you to understand my posts via an easier to read summary.
Here are the Cliff Notes:
My post linked to an article which cited the PRIMARY decision to use invasive equipment (I.e., ventilators in this case) was to reduce the risk that sick patients would infect health care workers. The operational characteristics of ventilators allow them to trap pathogens, therefore reducing the concentration of airborne pathogen units.
The FDA and CDC persisted throughout 2021 in recommending to the medical community that ventilators were the preferred equipment for combatting hypoxia … despite the manifest collateral risk of deadly secondary bacterial pneumonia from extended use of said ventilators … instead of encouraging noninvasive equipment for combatting hypoxia. Again, by mid-year 2020, the literature that suggested noninvasive means of combatting hypoxia was becoming more plentiful, and case study data proving that invasive means (ventilators) led to a high rate of patient fatalities.
(*). No, this doesn’t mean that ventilators, per se, killed patients. Don’t pretend that you don’t understand what is meant here.
(?). Are the defenders of priority use of ventilators (as the primary means to combat hypoxia in COVID patients) for an unjustifiably long period of time all professing that they don’t actually read medical literature, preferring instead for medical technology updates to be provided via conferences or outings sponsored by vendors of medical equipment suppliers? If the typical physician actually reads technology update related literature on their own, then how could they still have missed by 2021 that tracheal intubation tactics led to worse net health outcomes than noninvasive techniques had been established before year end 2020?
Hospitals are in the business of remaining operational and do not want to waste money. This applies for both nonprofit and ‘corporate’ hospitals. When they purchase equipment, they want that investment to pay off. What do you think happens to a hospital’s executive management when they report to their boards that a large sum of money was wasted on a particular category of equipment? You know the answer.
Physicians are employees (or ‘contractors’) of hospitals. They take direction from the management of the hospital. You know that this is true, also. If the hospital management instructs their doctors that ventilators are
By now, you realize that your ‘righteous indignation’ post was mistaken. I hope that you won’t remain angry.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31908]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37202
Joined: 11/22/03
|
That's bull poop...
3
Jun 8, 2023, 1:44 PM
|
|
His reply was to your post saying this:
If you object to my omission that hospitals had also put COVID patients on ventilators because of the high reimbursement rate to hospitals when ventilators got used, then my apologies. Hospitals were more than eager to snooker insurance providers and Medicare by deploying ventilators even when their use was not warranted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7159]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: That's bull poop...
Jun 8, 2023, 6:54 PM
|
|
You are focused on a collateral part of the discussion that immediately digressed from the subject matter in the OP.
The OP cited the WHO’s adoption of the P.R.Chinese recommendation of ventilators as having the primary benefit of reducing the risk of infection of hospital workers if patients were put on ventilators.
The article did not assert that there was not any clinical benefit from using ventilators.
(*). The key takeaway is that the WHO prioritized reducing the risk of spreading COVID to healthcare workers over the objective of maximizing the likelihood of a healthy outcome for the COVID patients.
Xxxxxx
The first series of responses were lessons about hypoxia and that health authorities did not widely recognize that ventilator use contributed to elevated risk of death from secondary bacterial pneumonia infections. No argument at all to dispute the allegations that the WHO’s priority was to protect hospital workers and that patient outcomes were not the primary objective when using ventilators.
Even Tiggity’s links described how, as of Oct. 2020, the merits of noninvasive equipment to combat hypoxia were worthy of consideration.
Xxxxxx
From the above, the discussion turned back to why, even throughout H1-2021, did the FDA keep pushing the ventilator approach when by Q4-2020 it was known that noninvasive equipment was good at combatting hypoxia while also greatly reducing the risks of secondary bacterial pneumonia infections via use of ventilators?
Xxxxxx
Look, I get it. Reading the entire thread and each of the links … thoroughly … is a lot to expect from the casual per user of TNet topics. It’s your prerogative to either commit to understanding the entire string and the links or to grab a beer and do something else.
Do what you wanna do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31908]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37202
Joined: 11/22/03
|
I was focused on your post that I directly replied...
1
Jun 9, 2023, 8:11 AM
|
|
to. (I also read the entire thread btw)
You spend what seems like a fair bit of time typing long posts in an effort to deflect from specific comments YOU made...the I directly quoted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12165]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17895
Joined: 5/16/00
|
Re: With all due respect, please read more carefully
2
Jun 8, 2023, 2:13 PM
[ in reply to Re: With all due respect, please read more carefully ] |
|
the more you open your mouth, the more you show you don't understand the situation
physicians are indeed employees especially inpatient MDs. Yes they do have to answer to certain aspects, business decisions, equipment purchases etc. But I would be hard pressed with my experience to agree that clinical decisions of such magnitude as to intubate and ventilate patients were impacted by "suits" putting pressure on the physicians.
Also, MD's were doing what their training and experience directed them to do to combat viral pneumonia. Hypoxia AND other signs of respiratory failure (blood ph, CO2 levels) etc.
The other thing you may not know, it takes time to adequately assess outcomes. New disease process, it may take 1-2 years to adequately assess intervention vs outcome.
And I've also learned, those that start to use $100 words to try to appear more intellectually advanced, usually are more pomp than substance.
And my righteous indignation is in fact such, after losing a father who was on a ventilator for a month from covid, knowing that was a correct decision to do so initially. Comes from seeing friends as physicians who rented hotel rooms in the onset of the pandemic because they didn't want to risk bringing it home to their families. It comes from myself seeing patients every day thru the pandemic, wondering if that was the day I was going to catch it from one of them. It comes from people insinuating that the people making these sacrifices would allow something to sway decisions that weren't in the best health interest of their patients. Does that happen on occasion, sure, but not wholesale as you so "eloquently" tried to state. So yes, if you did sense indignation. your meter is calibrated well.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31908]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 37202
Joined: 11/22/03
|
it begs the question RememberTheDanny....
1
Jun 8, 2023, 2:18 PM
|
|
how is it that you "know" what you are so forcefully claiming is true (in regards to docs using ventilator improperly)?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7159]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 10/6/21
|
Re: With all due respect, please read more carefully
1
Jun 8, 2023, 7:25 PM
[ in reply to Re: With all due respect, please read more carefully ] |
|
Of course you have more medical experience than I, and are also in contact with the day to day struggles to practivpce medicine.
I also respect individual physicians are highly motivated to care for their patients.
Thank God! (No blasphemy intended here.)
My anecdotal ‘experiences’ with physicians comes from detailed conversations with extended family members, neighbor friends who are retired physicians, selected specialists (endocrinologist for my wife, GI for both my wife & me), and long standing relationships with two personal physicians (one being a PCP and the other being an allergist) who were both new to the medical profession when I started going to them. My PCP is a Pakistani who in his early days struggled to keep patients because of 911 related prejudices. He and I lived close to each other and we’d BS in the grocery store when bumping into each other. Forgive me for bragging, but several of these people seem willing to talk to me about topics other than my clinical situation.
Again, it’s anecdote, but here is what I’ve learned. Few of them read literature other than JAMA and selected articles in other journals associated with their specialty. Some of them admitted to serious concerns about COVID vaccines based on unpredictable bad events with their patients, staff, &/or family members. As of early 2021, most were aware of problems from ventilators, even though only my allergist and PCP had close involvement with COVID patients. None of them mentioned noninvasive equipment to combat hypoxia; all of them cited CDC, FDA, and JAMA standard recommended equipment … ventilators.
They also learn from conferences, outings sponsored by pharma / medical equipment / medical software suppliers, and as participants in clinical trials that are each focused upon late stage developmental drugs. My anecdotal experience / relationships have not given me any personal insights about physicians ‘test driving’ ready-to-launch new equipment.
(*). The literature that physicians read was apparently ‘tardy’ in elevating their awareness about the viability of noninvasive equipment alternatives to ventilators with respect to combatting hypoxia.
Why was that?
I’ve stated my speculative reasons for physicians being only belatedly aware of this ‘oversight’ previously in my posts.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [31520]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10212
Joined: 1/28/15
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [12592]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 6313
Joined: 12/24/15
|
Re: Are you brain damaged?***
1
Jun 8, 2023, 5:55 PM
|
|
Probably not, but it’s fascinating how someone with limited knowledge of medicine and the interface of hospital administrators and physicians feels knowledgeable enough about either subject to pontificate about this.
He simply doesn’t know what he’s talking about.
Physicians as a whole I would wager would be doing better financially if the same effort that was expended in studying in college and medical school and the hours spent in residency were spent studying business, etc.
To float the stupid idea that physicians were putting folks on vents for monetary reasons or that hospital administrators were encouraging them to do so is just ignorant and insulting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7159]
TigerPulse: 96%
Posts: 9716
Joined: 10/6/21
|
No one (nobody) has addressed key ? Of the very 1st post
1
Jun 9, 2023, 8:35 AM
|
|
Why the reluctance from each responder to think about the original matter as described in the original post, e.g., that WHO (World Health Organization) adopted the COVID 19 patient treatment protocol of using ventilators … with the primary ‘advantage’ of using ventilators vs noninvasive equipment that boosted blood oxygen … because use of ventilators reduced the risk that COVID 19 would spread from patients to hospital workers.
That is a long sentence, so please read it a few times to grasp it.
Not a single responder attempted to address this.
The first serious respondent (Tiggity) explained hypoxia. Very good. But he deflected on the original topic by deriding the website as a “nut job” website. Nothing substantive in his response where it mattered. Just a deflection via an insult.
Not a single other respondent addressed the original question. Deflective name calling? Plenty of that. Righteous indignation and defense of medical professionals who followed orders and used the ventilators? This happened; the reflex to for physicians to defend their care practices missed the main issue / subject which was why the post was initiated. Substantive discussion about the original topic? Nada.
If someone … anyone … cares to address why the original post (again, refer to the 1st sentence in this very post) is bogus, then please do. If no one responds with a direct answer along with their knowledge about WHO and why WHO would never ever have such distorted priorities, then please have at it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 25
| visibility 578
|
|
|
50
