Coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2 / COVID-19) and Tinnitus

[Bill Bauer]

@linearb

statewide social distancing measures were associated with a decrease in U.S. COVID-19 growth.

That's has to be true, the question is are we talking about "more deaths", or "so many deaths that it would make sense to have a lockdown to avoid those deaths".

Seidner noted that high testing rates and high confirmed cases feed one another.

This problem could have easily be mitigated by having randomized testing. Since no randomized testing has been done, all of the stats are suspect and no extrapolation is credible.

The whole point of statistics is that you can get narrow confidence intervals with relatively small sample sizes. A sample with a thousand or ten thousand observations would have been given them accurate and precise estimates.

 

[Ed209]

Why is that? Yes, they didn't do as well as Denmark, but you would think that we are going along with the lockdowns to prevent a huge disaster, and it has clearly not materialized in Sweden. Shouldn't we learn from their experience and do something about our mistakes?!

Not just Denmark, but all of the other Nordic countries combined. I'm not entirely sure what we are to gain from their experience, yet, as they have a vastly higher death rate than their neighbours and there's no sign of it slowing down.

Remember that the goal is to stop hospitals from being overwhelmed and stretched beyond their capacity. I don't think any country knows what to do at the moment as there is no clear consensus on what works and what doesn't. Essentially they're damned if they do and damned if they don't, but most countries appear to be taking a cautious approach rather than a more cavalier one.

Who knows what the global numbers would be right now without a lockdown of some sort? And who knows if it was ultimately the right thing to do?

None of us do. We can only make assumptions based on educated guesses.

 

[Bill Bauer]

Not just Denmark, but all of the other Nordic countries combined.

As you pointed out, the population of Denmark + that of Finland gives us a number that is similar to the population of Sweden.

Remember that the goal is to stop hospitals from being overwhelmed and stretched beyond their capacity.

THUS far, that hasn't happened in Sweden.

I must say that given that I often (though not always) agree with @Bill Bauer on matters tinnitus, particularly regarding the dangers of loud noise exposure, I am somewhat surprised by his views on coronavirus.

I believe that tinnitus sufferers (whose ears have likely been compromised) ought to be careful. Likewise all of the people who suffer from a serious disease, as well as the elderly are vulnerable, and have to be isolated.

This means that the healthy people under 55 can live our lives (albeit while avoiding all social events that we can easily avoid, and wearing masks and glasses/sunglasses in public). As for those who are over 55 who want to work, all that needs to be done is making it socially acceptable for them to wear extra protection. A suit like the one Putin and others who plan to come into contact with coronavirus patients have been wearing comes to mind.

 

[Bill Bauer]

encourage everyone to go out and fight for their collective freedom like Braveheart.

Do you still think that's not justified?

 

[FGG]

Why is that? Yes, they didn't do as well as Denmark, but you would think that we are going along with the lockdowns to prevent a huge disaster, and it has clearly not materialized in Sweden. Shouldn't we learn from their experience and do something about our mistakes?!

When I first heard Trump's comments, I thought that they were ridiculous Because they were evidence that he has little understanding of the impact UV and disinfectants on the human body. The fact that there Are actual treatments involving UV irradiation of the lungs and breathing in hydrogen peroxide shows that his comments weren't ridiculous (independently of whether or not he was aware of those treatments when he asked his questions).

Now why he hasn't brought up Healight and that hydrogen peroxide treatment in his later interviews is in fact a mystery. If he hasn't been aware of those therapies before that conference where he made his remarks, those therapies must have been brought to his attention afterwards.

Why he hasn't attempted to defend himself is an important question (the answer to which is probably horrifying), but it has nothing to do with the actual incident in question.

He 100% was not talking about hydrogen peroxide. He was very clearly speculating about isopropyl alcohol and it is such a stretch to imply anything else especially when he essentially said "sike!" the next day.

 

[david c]

I believe that tinnitus sufferers (whose ears have likely been compromised) ought to be careful. Likewise all of the people who suffer from a serious disease, as well as the elderly are vulnerable, and have to be isolated.

This means that the healthy people under 55 can live our lives (albeit while avoiding all social events that we can easily avoid, and wearing masks and glasses/sunglasses in public).
View attachment 38424

But what you don't seem to have thought about Bill is that the elderly, vulnerable with underlying health conditions depend on a large number of carers, some relatives, some professional. Those carers need to go out and about for basic things like shopping. If social distancing measures were completely lifted those carers are going to be much more vulnerable to contracting coronavirus and passing it on to those they are caring for- leading to a sharp rise in fatalities. Masks and measures such as hand washing are important but only provide limited protection.

When infection rates and deaths have sharply reduced there can be very gradual and limited lifting of lockdown - eg some shops and hairdresser to reopen, with social distancing in place. That's what's happening in some European countries at the moment. But complete rapid lifting of lockdown would only lead to a second wave in infections (similar to what happened with the Spanish flu epidemic of 1918-19) and many more deaths.

 

[Bill Bauer]

He 100% was not talking about hydrogen peroxide. He was very clearly speculating about isopropyl alcohol and it is such a stretch to imply anything else especially when he essentially said "sike!" the next day.

Please watch the video again (like I did) and you will see that he has used the word "disinfectant". Hydrogen peroxide is a disinfectant. Correct me if I am wrong, the only problem with this whole incident used to be that he has seemingly demonstrated profound lack of knowledge of biology. But now it turns out that it is those of us who thought that a disinfectant like hydrogen peroxide can't be used internally to treat viruses are the ones who had been ignorant. Right?!

 

[Bill Bauer]

Those carers need to go out and about for basic things like shopping.

I don't know how the lockdown is being implemented where you live, but where I live (and everywhere I read about) people Still need to go out for basic things like shopping. I agree that people who live in the same household as someone from a vulnerable group should be allowed and encouraged to not come to work (and the government should help to pay their salary) Since there are few multi-generation households in North America, this would be a lot cheaper than the current system.

 

[Bill Bauer]

He 100% was not talking about hydrogen peroxide. He was very clearly speculating about isopropyl alcohol and it is such a stretch to imply anything else especially when he essentially said "sike!" the next day.

I looked at the slides during the presentation, and isopropyl alcohol was the only disinfectant there, however, the doctor mentioned "we are also looking at other disinfectants."

Here is what Trump said: "Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside, or almost a cleaning?" The question in bold font seems ridiculous, but it turns out that it isn't: We can use the disinfectant hydrogen peroxide inside the body to eliminate the virus. Right?

 

[Ed209]

This interview mirrors the current debate on here. The mayor of Las Vegas talks about wanting to reopen everything, but of course, the risk here is that Vegas gets a lot of its money from tourism. Is it a good idea to have large gatherings that can then disperse around the country?

 

[linearb]

This interview mirrors the current debate on here. The mayor of Las Vegas talks about wanting to reopen everything, but of course, the risk here is that Vegas gets a lot of its money from tourism. Is it a good idea to have large gatherings that can then disperse around the country?

They won't be dispersing here; I look forward to learning the results of the great American re-opening experiment from my compound in the woods.

We're not putting kiddo back into childcare until fall at earliest. I have no clear optics on how any of this will play out and neither does anyone else, so be smart and stay safe.

We're definitely gonna smash 60k this week. The IHME is working on a new model to reflect the rate at which we did a speedrun on the old one.

edit:

During the COVID-19 epidemic's first wave, the US could reach 67,641 cumulative deaths (estimate range of 48,058 to 123,157). Today's release is higher than the average US predictions for cumulative COVID-19 deaths published on April 17 (60,308, with an estimate range of 34,063 to 140,381) and April 21 (64,976, with an estimate range of 45,375 to 124,120), though the uncertainty intervals still overlap considerably.

So, revised upwards three times in the last week, and they are also very clearly saying "first wave" now.

This virus isn't ending any time soon.

 

[FGG]

Please watch the video again (like I did) and you will see that he has used the word "disinfectant". Hydrogen peroxide is a disinfectant. Correct me if I am wrong, the only problem with this whole incident used to be that he has seemingly demonstrated profound lack of knowledge of biology. But now it turns out that it is those of us who thought that a disinfectant like hydrogen peroxide can't be used internally to treat viruses are the ones who had been ignorant. Right?!

Hydrogen Peroxide was never brought up in the press briefing. Not once.

This whole argument seems like a semantic way to form a completely left-field hypothetical situation where Trump could have sounded smart but the problem is that:

a) Trump definitely meant isopropyl alcohol

b) He claims he was asking a dumb question on purpose to "see what would happen" and mock reporters and that the remarks were "sarcasm."

At least to me: "well, maybe there is an alternate way we can view how he used disinfectant. What he Trump himself says or meant is irrelevant" doesn't seem like a very good defense.

 

[linearb]

More models all over the map, more good reasons for me to continue my even more hermitic than usual existence through the summer This is coming from Philadelphia Children's Hospital, so I'd inherently expect their bias to run more towards "not overwhelming system" and "less dead kids" than anything overtly partisan. That doesn't mean they're right, but scientifically intended data seems less suspect than obviously partisan data.

The amount of shit I'll be able to get done around our property if I never have to leave is staggering!!

 

[Lilah]

I received an "anecdote" from someone from another forum about HCQ. Obviously I'm still paranoid about the virus, so I hope this is true.

"I just participated in a survey with 100,000 people, from all over the world, with lupus, RA and other autoimmune diseases and COVID-19.

29% of the people took Plaquenil, many had COVID-19. They all had very mild symptoms, and recovered quickly. And that's a lot of people who are on Plaquenil and got the virus.

I also heard that the reason the Chinese started using Plaquenil, was because there was only a few people with COVID-19 who were on Plaquenil for lupus, and the few recovered easily.

Another to remember is the Plaquenil is not an immune suppressant. So you still have a strong immune system to fight the virus.

[...Description of personal health issues...]

I think Plaquenil is going to protect us both! Let me know how you are doing in the next while."

 

[GregCA]

View attachment 38431

More models all over the map, more good reasons for me to continue my even more hermitic than usual existence through the summer This is coming from Philadelphia Children's Hospital, so I'd inherently expect their bias to run more towards "not overwhelming system" and "less dead kids" than anything overtly partisan. That doesn't mean they're right, but scientifically intended data seems less suspect than obviously partisan data.

The amount of shit I'll be able to get done around our property if I never have to leave is staggering!!

I wonder what, in the model, is responsible for the notch towards the end of June.

Also the graph seems to indicate that in all cases, we go back down to 0 in August. That's a bit surprising.

 

[david c]

I don't know how the lockdown is being implemented where you live, but where I live (and everywhere I read about) people Still need to go out for basic things like shopping. I agree that people who live in the same household as someone from a vulnerable group should be allowed and encouraged to not come to work (and the government should help to pay their salary) Since there are few multi-generation households in North America, this would be a lot cheaper than the current system.

No you just didn't get my comment. In the UK there are around 2 million people in the highly vulnerable shielding group. The great majority of these depend on carers, some of them may be family carers (many of whom may not live with those they are caring for), many will be professional carers the majority of whom will also not live with those they are caring for. These carers will need to be doing shopping and in many cases travelling to see those they are caring for. If social distancing is removed those carers will be much more likely to contract coronavirus and pass it on to those they are caring for - who are all in the high risk group.

But really, anyone who is trying to defend Trump's idiotic disinfectant comments - which the President himself is trying to disown by saying he meant them "sarcastically" - is clearly such a "flat-earther" that there is no point continuing further debate with them.

 

[linearb]

I wonder what, in the model, is responsible for the notch towards the end of June.

Also the graph seems to indicate that in all cases, we go back down to 0 in August. That's a bit surprising.

A lot of these models (including I believe the model lines in purple here) were only looking to August, figuring that was a "first wave" model.

However, this model's new (red dotted) may be pessimistic enough to assume a steep fall after the entire vulnerable population is burned through; unsure. If you really just let the brakes off entirely, you'll have a disease which becomes self-limiting a lot faster; you just have to deal with bodies stacking up in the streets in a way people have been so far uncomfortable with.

It is worth noting that as far as I can tell, the "60,000" IHME number was only ever intended to reflect a first wave through this summer. We've seen how hard it is to model this stuff even 4-6 weeks out, without comprehensive grid testing; modeling a second wave when we're still in the midst of a first is dodgy. Flu numbers given have all been annual, so any comparison between the IHME model and annual flu numbers was disingenuous to start with...

I think it's very safe to assume that whatever happens, the service sector is hit hard for the long haul. I have very little interest in spending money to dine inside a restaurant around other people any time soon, as well as a renewed confidence in my ability to hardly leave home and not be very bothered by it. A lot of places that have shuttered are not going to unshutter as the same establishment they were.

Probably a lot of property values will fall and banks, huge investment firms and foreign criminal organizations will come in and buy up commercial property with the same enthusiasm they bought up residential real estate in the 2008 crash?

 

[Bill Bauer]

These carers will need to be doing shopping and in many cases travelling to see those they are caring for.

Now I see your point.
It means that the carers should also be isolated. If only the vulnerable and their carers are isolated there would be funding to have the people dressed in full body gear that ensures that they aren't infected to do the food delivery to the vulnerable and their carers, allowing the carers to not leave the isolation area and Reducing the chance that the carers get infected.

anyone who is trying to defend Trump's idiotic disinfectant comments

Please explain what is idiotic about asking whether a UV light and disinfectant can be used internally when there is current research into just that. You pointed out to me something that I missed - that despite the carers going shopping both with and without social isolation, they are more likely to be infected at the store without social isolation. Perhaps there is something simple that I am missing about what makes the comments idiotic - please help me understand.

Hydrogen Peroxide was never brought up in the press briefing. Not once.

""Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside, or almost a cleaning?""

What part of "something like that" implies that it has to be one of the disinfectants mentioned during the meeting?

This whole argument seems like a semantic way to form a completely left-field hypothetical situation where Trump could have sounded smart

The argument is that there was nothing horrifying about his comments. How is it different from someone during the 19th century asking engineers "can we build flying machines"? It would have been "smart" if he were aware about those technologies before the original press conference. What would it be if he were not aware about those technologies?

Now ask yourself why he wouldn't mention those technologies despite being aware of their existence (which had to be the case the next day when he was using the "being sarcastic" explanation).

well, maybe there is an alternate way we can view how he used disinfectant. What he Trump himself says or meant is irrelevant

The difference between us might go back to exactly what it was that we found to be wrong with his original comments. To me the part that was wrong about the original comments was that it was evidence of gross lack of knowledge about how UV light and disinfectants work. What did You think was wrong with the original comments?

 

[FGG]

Now I see your point.
It means that the carers should also be isolated. If only the vulnerable and their carers are isolated there would be funding to have the people dressed in full body gear that ensures that they aren't infected to do the food delivery to the vulnerable and their carers, allowing the carers to not leave the isolation area and Reducing the chance that the carers get infected.

Please explain what is idiotic about asking whether a UV light and disinfectant can be used internally when there is current research into just that. You pointed out to me something that I missed - that despite the carers going shopping both with and without social isolation, they are more likely to be infected at the store without social isolation. Perhaps there is something simple that I am missing about what makes the comments idiotic - please help me understand.

""Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside, or almost a cleaning?""

What part of "something like that" implies that it has to be one of the disinfectants mentioned during the meeting?

The argument is that there was nothing horrifying about his comments. How is it different from someone during the 19th century asking engineers "can we build flying machines"? It would have been "smart" if he were aware about those technologies before the original press conference. What would it be if he were not aware about those technologies?

Now ask yourself why he wouldn't mention those technologies despite being aware of their existence (which had to be the case the next day when he was using the "being sarcastic" explanation).

The difference between us might go back to exactly what it was that we found to be wrong with his original comments. To me the part that was wrong about the original comments was that it was evidence of gross lack of knowledge about how UV light and disinfectants work. What did You think was wrong with the original comments?

To me, he was very plainly talking about isopropyl alcohol and it is a huge stretch given the context of the speech to think otherwise.

And what's wrong with those comments is that Trump presents his musings as fact. The problem is also that some people *also* take his musings as fact.

And how can he be pondering a treatment like hydrogen peroxide or Healight and saying his team is looking into this and *then* turning around to say that he was deliberately saying something dumb as a "just kidding" aimed at making fun of the press sarcastically? Do you not see how both those things cannot simultaneously be true?

 

[all to gain]

@Bill Bauer You really lowered the tone of the thread by posting a photo of that man

The sooner he is gone the better.

 

[Bill Bauer]

he was very plainly talking about isopropyl alcohol and it is a huge stretch given the context of the speech to think otherwise.

Are you saying that the meaning of
"Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside?"
And
"Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can inject That disinfectant inside?"
are identical? Yes or no? If the answer is the latter, then what is the difference in the meaning?

wrong with those comments is that Trump presents his musings as fact.

What fact is being conveyed by the question below?
"Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside, or almost a cleaning?"

And how can he be pondering a treatment like hydrogen peroxide or Healight and saying his team is looking into this and *then* turning around to say that he was deliberately saying something dumb as a "just kidding" aimed at making fun of the press sarcastically?

Like I wrote earlier, the answer to the question of why he wouldn't mention those treatments despite definitely being aware of them at the time he talked about "sarcasm" is horrifying (no matter what that answer turns out to be). But it has nothing to do with the controversy at hand.

 

[linearb]

I think the fact that numerous stage agencies and poison control centers got phone calls from people inquiring about drinking or injecting bleach or hydrogen peroxide, is evidence enough that the comments were ill-conceived and dangerous, without looking any deeper than that.

Further, I think that any given person who calls poison control to ask about the safety of drinking bleach, and then decides not to do so based on the information given, is likely smarter than our president -- because that person showed a willingness to go to an expert for expert advice, and then follow that advice.



I thought this picture was pretty funny because I agree with it and the depiction of Trump, but I think not at all for the reasons Garrison intended, and it's a little hard for me to understand what he was thinking, depicting his president-king as an impatient child who has no control over a situation that adults are running.

 

[all to gain]

because that person showed a willingness to go to an expert for expert advice, and then follow that advice.

This doesn't always hold true though. I have on numerous occasions been to experts, ie doctors, for their expert advice and have then followed that advice. I have been burnt every single time. Be wary of (so-called) experts...!!

But I get your point in this particular context

 

[david c]

Now I see your point.
It means that the carers should also be isolated. If only the vulnerable and their carers are isolated there would be funding to have the people dressed in full body gear that ensures that they aren't infected to do the food delivery to the vulnerable and their carers, allowing the carers to not leave the isolation area and Reducing the chance that the carers get infected.

No you still don't understand. The huge number of carers supporting the vulnerable can't isolate. They need to go to the grocery store to buy food not just for themselves but for the people they are caring for in most cases. They (in many cases) don't and can't live with the people they care for which means that they need to travel to see them - in many cases using public transport as carers can often not afford private cars.

So what needs to happen is that we maintain social distancing until the infection rate of this virus is under control, so that the carers aren't affected as well as all the people who are not in a highly vulnerable group but who are actually at high risk of death from coronavirus (typically men in there 50s and 60s) aren't affected also.

This has worked successfully for many countries - just to name a few - South Korea, Taiwan, Denmark, Czech Republic, New Zealand. You can only name one country which isn't doing this and which you think is a success: Sweden, but the reality is that it actually has had a lot more deaths than comparable countries which are doing it.

 

[Bill Bauer]

I think the fact that numerous stage agencies and poison control centers got phone calls from people inquiring about drinking or injecting bleach or hydrogen peroxide, is evidence enough that the comments were ill-conceived and dangerous, without looking any deeper than that.

If people with sick babies aren't buying pig hearts at their local grocery store to use to replace (without the help of a doctor) their child's heart after watching

press conferences where possible treatments are being discussed aren't the problem.

 

[Bill Bauer]

They need to go to the grocery store to buy food not just for themselves but for the people they are caring for in most cases.

Did you read my message:

there would be funding to have the people dressed in full body gear that ensures that they aren't infected to do the food delivery

Those vulnerable people whose carers can't be isolated with them (because it is a professional carer who is taking care of multiple people), can be isolated at hotels where a small number of carers isolated with them can take care of them, while having the food and other supplies securely delivered. This would cost a fraction of the current cost.

This has worked successfully for many countries

The simple plan of isolating the vulnerable has worked pretty well for Sweden, and they haven't even had to resort to the drastic measures that I had outlined above.

Please explain what is idiotic about asking whether a UV light and disinfectant can be used internally when there is current research into just that. You pointed out to me something that I missed - that despite the carers going shopping both with and without social isolation, they are more likely to be infected at the store without social isolation. Perhaps there is something simple that I am missing about what makes the comments idiotic - please help me understand.

@david c If you aren't able to address the above, your silence is an answer in itself.

 

[FGG]

Are you saying that the meaning of
"Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside?"
And
"Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can inject That disinfectant inside?"
are identical? Yes or no? If the answer is the latter, then what is the difference in the meaning?

What fact is being conveyed by the question below?
"Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside, or almost a cleaning?"

Like I wrote earlier, the answer to the question of why he wouldn't mention those treatments despite definitely being aware of them at the time he talked about "sarcasm" is horrifying (no matter what that answer turns out to be). But it has nothing to do with the controversy at hand.

So your whole argument is that the word "disinfectant" can refer to substances not discussed at that briefing even if that's not what Trump meant? And that the salient point here is that Trump's words (not how or why he used them) *could* have meant some potentially upcoming technology that he knew about but declined to mention. Therefore, it's wrong to chastise him.

This argument is honest to God getting too abstract for me and I'm not even sure how to proceed.

I think from each of our point of views, we clearly think the other is "missing the point" and I'm not sure a continued circular argument is going to fix that. So I quit?

 

[Daniel Lion]

Goooo Sweden... been following them and Brazil, although a lot messier than Sweden, with great interest and hope. Praying their approach works and a herd immunity can be achieved.

Hey @Bill Bauer, I woke up, as I do around 1.30 or 2 in the morning. I thought of you and the words, " Made it Ma, Top of the World", popped into my head from the great James Cagney in White heat. Strange that. Your a great debater and fighter. Why that popped into my head doesn't matter, just did.

I think we are on the same page about lock downs but not on Mr. Trump. Why bother defending the man, unless it gives you great satisfaction. The bigger question that transcends trump is about herd immunity, is it possible? Can people build up antibodies and be protected from reinfection, etc? I don't know, but the epidemiologists in Sweden and Dr. Fauci believe this should happen and this virus it not that unique as to this not happening. Gamble there, but a calculated one based on knowledge of virology etc... Which I don't possess. Also my spelling is on par with Mr. Trump's, I always keep a dictionary around.,

The asymptomatic cases are staggering. I read an article about prisons and that could be expanded to cruise ships. Upwards of 90 percent and more were asymptomatic in some American prisons... if that's the case, more fuel for a more relaxed approach.

Still concerned about the hearing regeneration movement, selfish I know. Worried about the founders who aren't young and ongoing trials. Want my ears back.

Also don't appreciate rolling back EPA measures and protections as I do care about our planet. When the virus is in check, we will still have to grapple with sustainable energies and lifestyle paradigms, if the worlds governments and people want to, most likely they won't.

 

[linearb]

If people with sick babies aren't buying pig hearts at their local grocery store to use to replace (without the help of a doctor) their child's heart after watching

press conferences where possible treatments are being discussed aren't the problem.

Do you not see the difference between an academic presentation from a specialist intended for a group of people with an academic level of knowledge, and a statement in mass media from the President of the United States?

Do you not think that the president of the united states has a higher level of responsibility and accountability than the average citizen?

 

[Bill Bauer]

So your whole argument is that the word "disinfectant" can refer to substances not discussed at that briefing even if that's not what Trump meant?

Your statement would make sense if what he said were to be "Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can inject That disinfectant inside?"
or even
"Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can inject disinfectant inside?"
Then it would be likely that he was talking about the disinfectant mentioned earlier at the press conference. What he actually said was
"Then I see the disinfectant, where it knocks it out in a minute, one minute. Is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside?"

Please explain why anyone would think that "something like that" would refer to the exact thing that the underlined word refers to, instead of the meaning being "a thing that is similar to the thing that the underlined word refers to."

And that the salient point here is that Trump's words (not how or why he used them)

At a press conference that had the purpose of informing the public of some of the efforts being made to combat the virus, he talked about some things that the researchers have been
looking at (UV) and might look into (disinfectant). Let me repeat

Correct me if I am wrong, the only problem with this whole incident used to be that he has seemingly demonstrated profound lack of knowledge of biology. But now it turns out that it is those of us who thought that a disinfectant like hydrogen peroxide can't be used internally to treat viruses are the ones who had been ignorant. Right?!

In other words, if the above wasn't what rubbed you the wrong way, what was it? If that's what you also found to be wrong, then why are you still finding it to be wrong?

@Bill Bauer You really lowered the tone of the thread by posting a photo of that man

The sooner he is gone the better.

Sorry, what photo/man are you talking about?

Do you not see the difference between an academic presentation from a specialist intended for a group of people with an academic level of knowledge, and a statement in mass media from the President of the United States?

I attempted to find a clip of a presentation by some official about the current/possible research into something, and that was the first link I saw that was along those general lines.

If an official states that researchers are looking into developing a procedure that would allow the doctors in the future to use X to treat Y, and some people go ahead and use X by itself (and not as part of the procedure and not under the supervision of a doctor), then any deaths that follow are on those people and not on the official.