2 points of question
1 medical treatment in the usa is private
= no money no health care
so price is important because it defines the ability of the working class poor whom are the majority, from obtaining it(what ever "it" may be)
soo... the question is about how the concept around politacising or non politacising of the concept can be measured against the access to the health care.
both sides of the political debate seem to agree that health care should not be universal health care
thus pay per cure cash up front
that is a moral cultural issue for the usa to deal with on its own death rates etc
so, while i openly support universal health care, i think other countrys opinions around how they tell the usa culture to change their morality needs to be measured against thier own set of Aid and morals as a cultural dynamic.
no body cares in the usa if there is a cure
only if there is a profit
similarly in some other countrys they wish to deny health care and deny contagion to maintain their own cultural systems
point 2(the only medical science point)
hydroxychloraquine ...
the malaria extract derivative compound
general anti-viral cocktail approach
from what i gathered it requires ongoing pre dosing to increase over all resistance to the virus getting inside the protein wall ?
the penetration aspect ?
so on a purely medical concept
what is a good over all product that increases resistance to viral penetration(the ability to prevent the virus from getting into the body in a way that effects the body)
testing ...
conflicts
i am not a virologist or biologist(no surprise)
what i wonder is that if most anti viral compounds have a general effect of elevating the blood pressure ?(actual question)
the point being co-morbidity is a heavily compounding factor
troll question for sample testing public acceptance
for example if the virus only killed fat people
would there be the same public reaction to the adoption of a treatment ?
yet fat people also share diabetes and heart issues(co-morbidity)
is the hydroxychloraquin issue a co-morbidity issue ?
if it has only a 50/50 chance of making any real difference, should it be licensed by the FDA ?
if the required dosage is 6 months prior and costing thousands of dollars
is it a cure ?
should those paying for it have a say in the issue ?(bit of a oxymoron but worth exploring for longitudinal sociology policy health care issues for universal health care countrys)
