Today, NBC published an article written by Michael Conway, critiquing President Trump's response to "science" during the pandemic. Conway used his scientific expertise to explain why Trump is ignoring science. The problem with the article is that it is filled with clear errors and obvious lies.
Let's start with the reporter, Michael Conway, and his expertise. Conway is a lawyer, which hardly makes him a scientific expert. His main claim to fame was as the head counsel for the Impeachment committee that investigated Richard Nixon in 1974. Of course, that impeachment was about Watergate, not science. So there's no reason to believe Conway has any expertise on medical or other science.
And what is his claim about Trump's disdain for science? First, he goes to the old standby: Trump's support for research into hydroxychloroquine. As Conway puts it, Trump, of course, had touted the drug [hydroxychloroquine] as a “game changer;” [but] studies have now repeatedly shown COVID-19 patients given the drug are more likely to die"
This claim is totally false. There is one study done at the VA that was not the sort of double blind study needed to evaluate the drug scientifically. It found on a retroactive basis that more people who got the drug died than those who did not. That's it; one study. Indeed, one scientifically defective study. Then there are at least two studies done in France which were also not double blind studies. In each of these studies, the findings were that hydroxychloroquine led to substantially better outcomes for patients. There are also some other studies but these are inconclusive. In short, there are no "repeated" studies that show patients getting the drug are more likely to die. But then again, those are the actual facts, something for which Conway seems to have little regard.
Next Conway goes off on Trump as anti-science because he supposedly told people to inject disinfectant into their bodies to fight the virus. Of course, anyone who saw Trump at the briefing where this came up knows that Conway's description of what Trump said is wrong. Indeed, after hearing about the effect of UV light and certain kinds of disinfectant on the virus, Trump asked whether there could be a therapeutic use of these facts in the fight against the virus. He even said that the doctors would have to look into that. Trump's response was about as scientific as one could be. He asked about therapeutic use and called for an investigation to determine if that were possible.
By the way, it's worth noting that Conway ignores the main part of the discussion which was about the use of UV light. There already is research underway and even devices developed to try to use the UV light to destroy the virus. Again, these are facts, something for which Conway has only disdain.
Okay, Conway is an old Democrat lawyer. He has his axe to grind and he obviously doesn't like Trump. That's not a surprise. My question, though, is why would NBC publish a phony article filled with misinformation and lies. That network well knows that Conway is far from accurate or truthful. NBC would do better if its goal were to present the truth rather than to present yet another hit piece on the president.
Let's start with the reporter, Michael Conway, and his expertise. Conway is a lawyer, which hardly makes him a scientific expert. His main claim to fame was as the head counsel for the Impeachment committee that investigated Richard Nixon in 1974. Of course, that impeachment was about Watergate, not science. So there's no reason to believe Conway has any expertise on medical or other science.
And what is his claim about Trump's disdain for science? First, he goes to the old standby: Trump's support for research into hydroxychloroquine. As Conway puts it, Trump, of course, had touted the drug [hydroxychloroquine] as a “game changer;” [but] studies have now repeatedly shown COVID-19 patients given the drug are more likely to die"
This claim is totally false. There is one study done at the VA that was not the sort of double blind study needed to evaluate the drug scientifically. It found on a retroactive basis that more people who got the drug died than those who did not. That's it; one study. Indeed, one scientifically defective study. Then there are at least two studies done in France which were also not double blind studies. In each of these studies, the findings were that hydroxychloroquine led to substantially better outcomes for patients. There are also some other studies but these are inconclusive. In short, there are no "repeated" studies that show patients getting the drug are more likely to die. But then again, those are the actual facts, something for which Conway seems to have little regard.
Next Conway goes off on Trump as anti-science because he supposedly told people to inject disinfectant into their bodies to fight the virus. Of course, anyone who saw Trump at the briefing where this came up knows that Conway's description of what Trump said is wrong. Indeed, after hearing about the effect of UV light and certain kinds of disinfectant on the virus, Trump asked whether there could be a therapeutic use of these facts in the fight against the virus. He even said that the doctors would have to look into that. Trump's response was about as scientific as one could be. He asked about therapeutic use and called for an investigation to determine if that were possible.
By the way, it's worth noting that Conway ignores the main part of the discussion which was about the use of UV light. There already is research underway and even devices developed to try to use the UV light to destroy the virus. Again, these are facts, something for which Conway has only disdain.
Okay, Conway is an old Democrat lawyer. He has his axe to grind and he obviously doesn't like Trump. That's not a surprise. My question, though, is why would NBC publish a phony article filled with misinformation and lies. That network well knows that Conway is far from accurate or truthful. NBC would do better if its goal were to present the truth rather than to present yet another hit piece on the president.
No comments:
Post a Comment