I've found the next armchair QB issue, and it's hydochloroquine-zinc

You see, many non-doctors and doctors are saying that this drug must be fully vetted, which historically means five years.  China has already been using hydrochloroquine for serious cases of the beer virus with success.  Of course, they didn't vett the drug as America historically does.

If we confirm after lots and lots of clinical tests that the drug has effecacy, the Liberal armchair QB's are going to whine and bitch, complaining that Trump didn't speed the process.................like China.

Okay Libs, how much testing should be done before it's cleared for use?  Also, if the drug gets pushed through quickly, and it turns out there are surprising side effects, are you going to whine about Trump?  We all know the answer to this question.

Once again Liberals, when is Trump to follow the doctors suggestions, and when should he not?  I've noticed that our resident Liberals refuse to address this question.

Be careful Liberals.  If you take a stance on this now, you may not be able to whine later.  If you be careful and take no stance now, then you will be able to whine no matter the outcome...........and that's really the best of both worlds, isn't it?

The answer to your question is simple.

Outsource the answer to people who know what they are talking about instead of people who dont.   When the majority of the medical community agrees to go forward than I vote to proceed.  I dont give any creedance to the recomendations of Alex Jones.

So I guess that would be the difference between me and the president.

What else can I help with today?

Should a policy’s impact on, say, the economy be considered?  Let's say that top economists argue that one policy will assure a depression, and doctors say that this policy will lead to 200,000 deaths.  Another policy leads economists to conclude that a minor recession will happen, and doctors argue that 2,000,000 will die?  Now, how about that economists and others argue that a depression will lead to 3,000,000 premature deaths?

Listening to only one set of people with single agenda rarely leads to a good decision.  Listening only to doctors is ignorant, as there are many moving parts that PJ isn’t considering.

I can refute Boilerman's premise with one simple historical fact: in the US, the death rate was lower during the 1930s (Great Depression) than during the 1920s (Roaring Twenties).

And now, we have more economic strength and a stronger social safety net than we did then.

Your question that started this thread was specific to a medical drug.    I answered by saying  policy around medical drugs should be resolved by medical experts.     

So now you want to change the topic to the economy?

My answer is the same.   Ask people who know what they are talking about instead of people who dont.

Your new question is best put to a national pandemic team who would be experts on the best overall strategy for handling a pandemic which would include the line on health vs economy.     Too bad we dont have one and instead are relying on the president's approval ratings to guide policy.

What else can I help with today?

Kevin, then please explain the United States life expectancy decrease from 63 years in 1933 to a life expectancy of 58.5 in 1936 (7.15%).  Just bad luck, I guess, and nothing to do with the depression?

Kevin, then please explain the United States life expectancy decrease from 63 years in 1933 to a life expectancy of 58.5 in 1936 (7.15%).

My rough estimate is that a similar economic downturn today would lead to approximately 1.5 million premature deaths over a several year period.  My goal here is not to fight with you guys, but instead to get people considering the potential death ramifications caused by a horrible economy.  Let's not fight over this, but instead discuss it and consider it.  Maybe my numbers are wrong, and I'm willing to listen.

I would be fine in such a downturn.  My children would be fine in such a downturn.  Many others will not............about 1.5 million other people.

Nope, it is not 1936. Today, we have the means to feed people, keep them in housing and keep their lights on if Trump "reopens" the government May 1s it will be devastating the virus will spread like wildfire all over again.   

Psst! You might want to read this: Small Chloroquine Study Halted Over Risk of Fatal Heart Complications.

-There are several expedited drugs being tested to treat COVID-19 - one in particular from Gilead appears to be promising.   

-There is also  rapid testing that shows results in 5 minutes produced by Abbot Labs - mass prodcuction is expected by end of May.     

-There are also laser-thermometers that can be used to instantly check temperatures of people as they enter events or crowded spaces.   

-And Apple/Google are working on an app that can track your contact with anyone who may become infected.

Some combination of these things will likely be required to open the economy in a way that does not send us down the same track as March.    But I'll leave it to pandemic experts to tell us what that combination should be.   And by pandemic experts I dont mean Donald Trump's son-in-law.

Kevin, they had means to feed people in 1933............until they didn't.  We are spending and printing about $10,000 for every American.  We can't do this for long until we can't borrow.