“Oh, I see that you’re a rich - come with me to the executive wing of the hospital where we keep the cures”
No - the standard of care is not defined based on who or how much you have. You treat the same disease with the same treatment. Rich people can just afford treatments easier.
It was already in a trial and there is a law allowing “expanded use” to allow experimental drugs to be used on non-trial members under some circumstances. e.g. when the drug is safe, you are combating a novel virus for which we lack treatment, etc.
“experimental” drugs are not “better” - we don’t know if they work (they are experimental).
We didn’t know much about COVID-19 at the time and expanded use was frequent for drugs that are “generally considered safe” but whose effectiveness was questionable.
It was an emergency use - that the virus was novel, that we didn’t have adequate treatments for it yet, and Trump was considered to be in a high-risk category.
Yes - I would have had the same option were I in a high risk category.
Remember all those assholes getting Hydroxychloroquine? They were using a similar same emergency use authorization to do so since it was being used for things it was otherwise not authorized for.
I haven’t asked my insurance company. Maybe? I’ve been very clear that he will have easier access to healthcare due to his status. I expect you to ignore this as well as every other idiot who feels clever replying to me telling me that he will have easier access to healthcare.
But the standard with which he is treated is the same. He can just afford it more easily.
Edited to address:
Did other people also get it as soon as Trump did?
They had access to it the same time Trump did - the rule I linked to does not say “ONLY IF YOU’RE PRESIDENT”.
That’s not what standard of care refers to solely. You’re last sentence shows that the standard is not the same. Being able to afford things that others can’t, being able to pay for early access to specialists, and diagnostics are exactly what I mean by differing standard of care.
He has access to about the same amount of care as anyone with good health insurance. Sure he can pay for more specialists and such but that is often wasted resources. “more doctors” does not always mean “better result”. In fact some studies show it can be worse.
So what you’re saying is that you are choosing a very specific section of the definition. Instead of the entire definition to suit your argument. He does not have the same amount of care as anyone else. He was potus, and will be again, unfortunately.
So what you’re saying is that you are choosing a very specific section of the definition.
Every definition is a “very specific one”. I’m clarifying what I said and you’re coming at me with some sort of weird “gotcha” energy. I don’t expect you have noble intentions.
Instead of the entire definition to suit your argument.
I only pasted part because I wasn’t going to put the entire thing in a post. But what part of the rest of the section do you feel I should have included?
He does not have the same amount of care as anyone else.
No, there are sections your cherry picked, you didn’t use the entirety of the definition. Nothing about “gatcha”, just showing that your point doesn’t stand. The definition is also a legal matter, the potus has access to better health care, more direct health care. And you’re right i don’t have a citation for that because that was a typo. But here.
No, there are sections your cherry picked, you didn’t use the entirety of the definition.
This is fucking stupid. I bloody well did. The POINT I am making is that “standard of care” is a medial term that applies to how disease is evaluated, treated, etc. It’s not different based on income, social standing, etc.
In short - if you have X disease the standard of care says to treat it with Y treatment.
What YOU are talking about is… Which healthcare he has? The thing you posted just talks about how he has access to military benefits (which anybody in the military has access to).
But what wouldn’t change is HOW he is treated. Walter Reed will treat X disease the same as any other hospital.
He’s not receiving some extra-super-special treatment.
I would be surprised if he wasn’t, hence using the special treatment for covid on him. Also he is treated different because he can access medical aid faster and easier than anyone else. That’s littlerally a different standard of care.
It’s literally not standard of care as I am using it and as the medical industry uses it. You seem to want to redefine my term to match your needs.
Others could access the same experimental treatment using the same exception he used as I pointed out already, and I even linked to the ruling that allows for it.
It’s also not BETTER treatment it’s EXPERIMENTAL treatment. Many experimental treatments do NOT work out. Look at all the assholes using the SAME exception to get treated with hydroxychloroquine.
“Oh, I see that you’re a rich - come with me to the executive wing of the hospital where we keep the cures”
No - the standard of care is not defined based on who or how much you have. You treat the same disease with the same treatment. Rich people can just afford treatments easier.
When Trump got COVID five years ago, he got treatment that is still not available to the general public.
We didn’t know much about COVID-19 at the time and expanded use was frequent for drugs that are “generally considered safe” but whose effectiveness was questionable.
What was the special circumstance for which Trump got that treatment? Would you have had the option to also get it?
It was an emergency use - that the virus was novel, that we didn’t have adequate treatments for it yet, and Trump was considered to be in a high-risk category.
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=312.310
Yes - I would have had the same option were I in a high risk category.
Remember all those assholes getting Hydroxychloroquine? They were using a similar same emergency use authorization to do so since it was being used for things it was otherwise not authorized for.
Would your insurance have covered it? Did other people also get it as soon as Trump did?
I haven’t asked my insurance company. Maybe? I’ve been very clear that he will have easier access to healthcare due to his status. I expect you to ignore this as well as every other idiot who feels clever replying to me telling me that he will have easier access to healthcare.
But the standard with which he is treated is the same. He can just afford it more easily.
Edited to address:
They had access to it the same time Trump did - the rule I linked to does not say “ONLY IF YOU’RE PRESIDENT”.
deleted by creator
That’s not what standard of care refers to solely. You’re last sentence shows that the standard is not the same. Being able to afford things that others can’t, being able to pay for early access to specialists, and diagnostics are exactly what I mean by differing standard of care.
This is how I am using it:
A standard of care is a medical or psychological treatment guideline, and can be general or specific. It specifies appropriate treatment based on scientific evidence and collaboration between medical and/or psychological professionals involved in the treatment of a given condition. .
He has access to about the same amount of care as anyone with good health insurance. Sure he can pay for more specialists and such but that is often wasted resources. “more doctors” does not always mean “better result”. In fact some studies show it can be worse.
So what you’re saying is that you are choosing a very specific section of the definition. Instead of the entire definition to suit your argument. He does not have the same amount of care as anyone else. He was potus, and will be again, unfortunately.
Every definition is a “very specific one”. I’m clarifying what I said and you’re coming at me with some sort of weird “gotcha” energy. I don’t expect you have noble intentions.
I only pasted part because I wasn’t going to put the entire thing in a post. But what part of the rest of the section do you feel I should have included?
Citation needed.
No, there are sections your cherry picked, you didn’t use the entirety of the definition. Nothing about “gatcha”, just showing that your point doesn’t stand. The definition is also a legal matter, the potus has access to better health care, more direct health care. And you’re right i don’t have a citation for that because that was a typo. But here.
This is fucking stupid. I bloody well did. The POINT I am making is that “standard of care” is a medial term that applies to how disease is evaluated, treated, etc. It’s not different based on income, social standing, etc.
In short - if you have X disease the standard of care says to treat it with Y treatment.
What YOU are talking about is… Which healthcare he has? The thing you posted just talks about how he has access to military benefits (which anybody in the military has access to).
But what wouldn’t change is HOW he is treated. Walter Reed will treat X disease the same as any other hospital.
He’s not receiving some extra-super-special treatment.
I would be surprised if he wasn’t, hence using the special treatment for covid on him. Also he is treated different because he can access medical aid faster and easier than anyone else. That’s littlerally a different standard of care.
It’s literally not standard of care as I am using it and as the medical industry uses it. You seem to want to redefine my term to match your needs.
Others could access the same experimental treatment using the same exception he used as I pointed out already, and I even linked to the ruling that allows for it.
It’s also not BETTER treatment it’s EXPERIMENTAL treatment. Many experimental treatments do NOT work out. Look at all the assholes using the SAME exception to get treated with hydroxychloroquine.