https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/494519-trump-say...
'It was just a joke, bro' has to be the lamest excuse.
As an european citizen, I find it terrifying that the leader who is responsible for preserving NATO, and thus is the guardian of the Free World, shows such a poor lack of judgement.
https://www.mediaite.com/news/trump-claims-his-comments-on-i...
The man showcased profound misunderstanding, but he didn't prescribe lysol injections.
“I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute! And is there a way we can do something by an injection inside or almost a cleaning? Because you see it gets in the lungs... so it’d be interesting to check that.”
How are you going to check that injecting disinfectant into people won’t work against COVID-19 without injecting disinfectant into people?
He didn’t prescribe Lysol injections because he’s not a medical doctor and therefore not allowed to prescribe anything to anyone.
[1] https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/nyc-poison-control-cal...
I've also got to admit (at the risk of getting caught up in all of these political posts) that I find it strange that the parent article is on the front page. When I read the title (note: I didn't know about the Trump press conference at the time and had to look it up after seeing the comments in this thread) I actual thought to myself: "that sounds like a quack cure, you can't disinfect blood". Interestingly there does seem to be some effectiveness to the therapy, although for different reasons than disinfection.
Now that I know the political connection, however, what is upsetting to me is that the reason this post appears to be on the front page isn't because of some genuine evidence based interest in this therapy option, but instead to cover for the president's strange assertions about sterilizing blood. This includes quotes such as using "tremendous ultraviolet" or "just very powerful light" inside the body to kill the virus. It's the selective focus on the this one section of a speech that verbatim included advocacy for taking disinfectants internally (again, regardless of intention that's how people read it).
Research doesn't mean pulling out the one article that supports what you want to believe. It means putting in the time and effort to understand the ensemble of views on a subject and it's pretty clear that this UV therapy, although interesting, is some far out on left field technique. Even though it has some some efficacy, just as stuff like acupuncture and chiropractic therapy is evidence based, it's use for something like Covid-19 seems questionable.
[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52407177
[2] https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-52411706
[3] https://thehill.com/changing-america/well-being/prevention-c...
[4] https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/04/trump-my-idea-to-inj...
[1] https://health.wusf.usf.edu/post/despite-skeptics-alternativ...
In that way it's good that submissions only contain the article URLs, as the merit of the article is discussed, not the submission.
When I was teaching 1st graders about programming, I had to simplify many concepts and using physical objects to explain abstract ideas.
Look at how he talks about the wall on the Southern border. I cannot say for certain what was meant here.
Its really hard to know what the intent is without being able to read someone's mind.
Also, in a crisis situation like this, it is deeply irresponsible to be even slightly confusing.
And now, we have this: https://twitter.com/MDMEMA/status/1253721510570844162
It is incredibly strange and scary to me that not everyone is on the same page here. If you want to be generous you could say that the president was fatigued and had a 'brain fart' conflating the two. But this wasn't an issue with being articulate or not, or off the cuff or not, or how prescriptive he was. The man clearly thought that disinfecting surfaces relates to treating people. I find it terrifying that our leader could make such a mistake, especially at this stage of the pandemic.