OK, so let’s analyze the latest hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) study.

This study comes out of Brazil.  It was published in the New England Journal of Medince on 7/23/2020.  It is entitled:  Hydroxychloroquine with or without Azithromycin in Mild-to-Moderate Covid-19.  It’s authors are:  Alexandre B. Cavalcanti, M.D., Ph.D., Fernando G. Zampieri, M.D., Ph.D., Regis G. Rosa, M.D., Ph.D., Luciano C.P. Azevedo, M.D., Ph.D., Viviane C. Veiga, M.D., Ph.D., Alvaro Avezum, M.D., Ph.D., Lucas P. Damiani, M.Sc., Aline Marcadenti, Ph.D., Letícia Kawano-Dourado, M.D., Ph.D., Thiago Lisboa, M.D., Ph.D., Debora L. M. Junqueira, M.D., Pedro G.M. de Barros e Silva, M.D., Ph.D., Lucas Tramujas, M.D., Erlon O. Abreu-Silva, M.D., Ligia N. Laranjeira, Ph.D., Aline T. Soares, M.D., Ph.D., Leandro S. Echenique, M.D., Adriano J. Pereira, M.D., Ph.D., Flávio G.R. Freitas, M.D., Ph.D., Otávio C.E. Gebara, M.D., Ph.D., Vicente C.S. Dantas, M.D., Ph.D., Remo H.M. Furtado, M.D., Ph.D., Eveline P. Milan, M.D., Ph.D., Nicole A. Golin, M.D., Fábio F. Cardoso, M.D., Israel S. Maia, M.D., Conrado R. Hoffmann Filho, M.D., Adrian P.M. Kormann, M.D., Roberto B. Amazonas, M.D., Ph.D., Monalisa F. Bocchi de Oliveira, M.D., Ary Serpa-Neto, M.D., Ph.D., Maicon Falavigna, M.D., Ph.D., Renato D. Lopes, M.D., Ph.D., Flávia R. Machado, M.D., Ph.D., and Otavio Berwanger, M.D., Ph.D.et al., for the Coalition Covid-19 Brazil I Investigators.

Analyzing  this study is treacherous because COVID-19 is as much a political disease as it is a real disease.  Doctors and patients have chosen sides, and we hate each other’s guts.  We stand champing at the bit to take each other down.

My bias:  I despise Dr. Fauci and Coach K.  I believe Dr. Fauci to be a war criminal, and I can back up my beliefs.

Financial interests:  None from Corporate America or anywhere else.  I just want my life back.

With that stated, let’s get to the study.

I will preface my remarks by stating that too many authors might spoil the broth.

First let’s note that the study was limited to 667 total patients. 438 of those patients received hydroxychloroquine, 229 patients did not. Of the 438 patients who received hydroxychloroquine, 217 of them also received azithromycin.

I would hardly call this a huge study.  For me for 400 patients is the lower limit of what I would accept for a study to be meaningful.  

On a slightly humorous note, this study took place over 55 hospitals. I find this humorous because for the last four months we have been regaled with hysterical accounts of “the medical war zone.”  So, you’re telling me that you had to do this study over 55 hospitals?  If we truly had medical war zones, one or two hospitals should’ve been enough.  

That this study took place over 55 hospitals is worrisome to me because it indicates that one is less likely to maintain consistency in how the patients are cared for, how they are monitored or ultimately graded.  

That’s a big flaw for me.

Another red flag for me is that the study appears in the New England Journal of Medicine. The New England Journal of Medicine to me is Corporate America’s journal.  I don’t trust the objectivity of the New England Journal of Medicine. They’ve already had to retract at least one article regarding the coronavirus.  The NEJM is now to medicine what The Economist is to world affairs – a mouthpiece for globalism.

Now, let’s get to the authors’ stated limitations of the study.  These are their own words.

Our trial has several limitations. First, although the point estimate of effect suggests no major difference between the groups with respect to the primary outcome, the trial cannot definitively rule out either a substantial benefit of the trial drugs or a substantial harm. For the comparison between hydroxychloroquine and control, for example, our data are compatible with odds ratios as low as 0.69 and as high as 2.11. Second, the trial was not blinded. Third, despite intense efforts to maintain adherence to the assigned treatments, a lack of medications that were perceived as beneficial by clinicians and patients led to some protocol deviations. Fourth, the use of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin was widespread among patients hospitalized with Covid-19 in participating hospitals. The enrollment of patients with no previous use of these medications was challenging, so we decided to enroll patients provided that their previous use since the onset of symptoms was limited to 24 hours. Finally, although the median time from symptom onset to randomization was 7 days, we included patients up to 14 days after the beginning of symptoms; it is conceivable that interventions that may limit viral replication (e.g., hydroxychloroquine) may be more effective earlier in the course of the disease.

1  the trial cannot definitively rule out either a substantial benefit of the trial drugs or a substantial harm.

Okay, then why are Dr. Fauci and his cheerleaders claiming that this study vindicates them?  I don’t see the study vindicating them at all.  I think this study is a point in their favor, but I also think that a more controlled study is in order.

2  the trial was not blinded.  

This is huge.  Suppose a doctor with a bias against HCQ decided to not be aggressive with other treatment modalities.   Suppose the patients assigned to the HCQ “team” were the most sick and least likely to have a good outcome.

3  despite intense efforts to maintain adherence to the assigned treatments, a lack of medications that were perceived as beneficial by clinicians and patients led to some protocol deviations.

Again, this is huge.  What are these deviations? Were these deviations skewed against the patients receiving hydroxychloroquine?

4  the use of hydroxychloroquine plus azithromycin was widespread among patients hospitalized with Covid-19 in participating hospitals. The enrollment of patients with no previous use of these medications was challenging, so we decided to enroll patients provided that their previous use since the onset of symptoms was limited to 24 hours.

So are they saying that people who were assigned to the control group, those not receiving HCQ, actually did receive HCQ for a day?  This probably is not that big a deal.  

5  We recruited 667 patients, including 504 patients with confirmed Covid-19.

Only 504 of the 667 patients had confirmed COVID-19?  I am trying to be as fair as I can, but shouldn’t all the patients have been confirmed as COVID-19?  Is there something I’m missing here?  Is it standard research procedure to incorporate blanks into your study?  How can you possibly call your study valid if not all your people are confirmed to have the disease you are intending to study?  Is a clinical diagnosis alone valid?  If these patients were as bad off as we believe them to be in order to warrant being included in the study, shouldn’t they have been positive for COVID-19? Are we saying that the virus couldn’t be found in their body?

Finally, a metaphysical  comment.  If it were so tough to find patients who had not been treated with HCQ over 55 hospitals, what does that say about what doctors think about HCQ?  Evidently, they must like the drug or have a gut feel that it works.

Of course, we must be fair.  I am always fair.  Whether I am reviewing a lousy restaurant or a study, I am always fair.

This study indicates that we should be cautious about viewing HCQ as a cure-all for a miracle drug for COVID-19.  But in no way, does this study rule out HCQ as a partner in the armamentarium against the coronavirus.

As for the side effects, I find the elevation of liver enzymes minimal. The QTc prolongation evidently has not prevented doctors at 55 hospitals from prescribing the drug.  As any doctor knows, there are many drugs that prolong the QTc interval. That we would deny someone a potentially life saving drug based upon QTc prolongation seems extreme.

Ruling:  Doctors in the United States should be allowed to prescribe HCQ for COVID-19.

 Thank you.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley, MD

McAllen, TX 

Thursday, July 30, 2020

Copyright 2020   Archer Crosley   All Rights Reserved

Say, do you remember Tom Hanks, the new Jimmy Stewart, the nicest, most honest guy in America?

Of course you do. 

Do you remember when he said we were going to get through this together?

He said it on Saturday Night Live.  I know he did.  I checked it out.

He sounded so folksy and earnest.

By this, of course,  he meant the coronavirus crisis.

Well, where did he go?

Hey, Tom, where did you go?

What?  You went to Greece?

What are you doing in Greece, Tom? I thought you said we were going to get through this together.

Oh, I see, you moved to Greece.  You went the full Monty, eh?

What’s that you say? Your wife is part Greek?

Yes, I know that. When I found out the news, I immediately looked that up on Wikipedia. Her mother is from Greece and her father is from that area also.

But wait a minute. I thought you said we were going to get through this together.

Of course, I always knew that you would be living better than me.

But I thought you meant you would be “helping” me from Beverly Hills.

I didn’t think you would move out of the country.

I understand that the weather is beautiful over there, but, hey, I’m living here.

If you’re over there, how can you be helping me get through this together?

Shouldn’t you be suffering through the massive economic shutdown that we are going through? 

Shouldn’t you be sheltering here at home in the United States? 

Don’t you want to live in the Marxist paradise that your friends in Corporate America are building for us?

Shouldn’t you be suffering like we are?

Is that what getting through this together means?

That’s what it means to me.

I didn’t know that getting through this together meant lying on the beach in the Greek Isles.

Don’t you care about us?

For sure, I thought you did. You were one of the first celebrities out there telling us to shelter at home, flatten the curve, engage in social distancing.

It sounded so authentic.  Who wouldn’t believe the nicest, most honest guy in America, America’s new Jimmy Stewart?

Boy, that’s some social distancing that you are engaging in over there in the Greek Isles.  That’s more than six feet, right?

I’ll bet you have a pretty nice house over there too.

It’s too bad that many Americans may not have a house at all after this economic catastrophe that you and your friends in Corporate America have put us through.

That’s right, Tom. Your advice and the advice of many of your Hollywood friends to stay at home, to flatten the curve, to social distance has destroyed the economy of the United States of America.

Millions of people have lost or will lose their businesses.

Things are going to get really tough around here.

Don’t you think it would be a good idea to be here to loan your moral support?

After all, you said we were going to get through this together.

Of course, I knew it was bullshit, but how about people like my mom who trust you and believe in you.

You see, Tom, I felt right from the beginning that you and your wife didn’t have the coronavirus. I felt it was bullshit because there were too many celebrities that were getting the disease out of proportion to the regular population.

I saved every interview you did and analyzed them.  You slipped up on a few items. 

Plus the elites are lazy, and they really didn’t think through your cover story.

I felt that the odds of you having the coronavirus were pretty damn slim.

But, you’re lucky.

You have your friends in Corporate America who control the media, and they have put forth this Jimmy Stewart image of you – this amazing lie of a regular, honest guy.

I know that’s bullshit, and I suspect that you know that it’s bullshit.

But that’s irrelevant; people trust you.  That’s why the elites selected you as one of the first celebrities to come out with the coronavirus. They knew people would believe you. They were trying to sell the disease.  

Who better than Tom Hanks?

I guess in a way I am glad that you did what you did in leaving the United States.  In fact, I’m glad you’re out of the United States. I hope you never come back to the United States.

To tell you the truth, the way things are going to get in the next ten years, which is pretty bad, you won’t want to come back to the United States.

Maybe, in a certain way, you knew that. Or maybe your corporate puppet-masters knew that and put you over there out of harm’s way.

You see, I think we’re going to see a new Jacobin reign of terror in the United States.

It’s going to be pretty tough for people like me.

Why is that?

Because I’m white, and I might just remind the crazy people at Black Lives Matter of slavery which they never experienced.

They may have to get rid of me. They may have to kill me

I may have to flee.

Where will I go?

Hey, I’ve got an idea. Why don’t I go to the Greek Isles?

You, Tom Hanks, went there, and you’re the new Jimmy Stewart.  If you think the Greek Isles are a nice place to go, why that might be the place for me.

That way we can get through this together.

I can always trust the new Jimmy Stewart, the nicest, most honest guy in America.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley, MD

McAllen, TX 

Sunday, July 28, 2020

Copyright 2020   Archer Crosley   All Rights Reserved

What we need to do to fix the coronavirus catastrophe is stick to the basics. Solving a problem does not require amazing thought or amazing insight; instead we need to stick to the basics that have been known to us for a long time.

1. Protect the elderly and the immunocompromised. These people should be placed in super-lockdown sites where no one gains entry unless we are absolutely sure they do not have the coronavirus. Temperature checks must be put in place.  My mother, who lives in a retirement home in the Philadelphia area, is 94.  Harry Houdini couldn’t break into that facility.
2. Quarantine the sick apart from elderly people. Given the crisis, there is no shortage of available hotel rooms to quarantine people.
3. Allow children to attend school.  We will need the children and the young to develop a solid measure of herd immunity.  Full herd immunity is not necessary at this point in time; we will take any measure of protection we can get. Children are remarkably resilient in handling the coronavirus.  The sooner we can get children interacting with each other, the further we will get in developing herd immunity.
4. Recognize that you are not saving lives by locking all of us up; you are costing lives. New people enter the elderly age bracket every day of the week. The only measure we have to protect them at this point, aside from locking them away, is herd immunity.  The sooner we get there, the better.
5. Allow businesses to stay open. There was never any hard-core science supporting the lockdown. The lockdown was counterproductive. The experience in many other countries supports this.
6. Understand that you can’t make the virus go away by locking people up in their houses.  You can only make the virus go away by creating immune people.  Locking people away creates a false, not a true, lowering of the R-naught value.  When coronavirus virgins come out of lockdown, the virus will be waiting.
7. Relocate as many elderly people as possible to warm, humid climates.  it has been known for some time that warm weather and higher humidity protect against the coronavirus.  An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
8. Stop the routine testing.  The tests are near worthless; they only serve to heighten the panic.  We need less fear, not more.  What are we doing with the tests anyway?  What do they mean?  Are we going to change our outpatient treatment which at this point is quarantine?  Or are we going to treat them clinically?
9. Stop the incentives for diagnosing and treating coronavirus.  These incentives have only muddied the waters.
10. Permit doctors to prescribe hydroxychloroquine.  There might be something there. 
11. Encourage Big Pharma to pursue a hydroxychloroquine analog.  Modern medicine was built upon anecdotal reports.  Nobody used Cox regression analysis in 1335.
12. Yes, pursue a vaccine but do so in a safe methodical manner without cutting corners.  We don’t want to give false hope; nor do we want to hastily administer an unsafe vaccine to compound the problem.    
13. All the people who have died of coronavirus must have their bodies exhumed and studied to ascertain the precise cause of death.
14. Conduct an intensive epidemiological survey of coronavirus victims, particularly after the surge took place in Texas. Find out who they knew, where they worked, who lives at home, who their friends are.  This can be accomplished through Facebook with stiff penalties for being untruthful.
15. Ditch the masks.  The masks are worthless and may indeed cause more disease by acting as a personal, wearable fomite.  Plus there is no cogent common-sense reasoning that supports why they should work.  Instead, double-down on what does work – religious handwashing.
16. Recognize that the pursuit of herd immunity is a viable methodology in combating the coronavirus.  Every species on the on the planet is here precisely because of herd immunity.  Our immune systems are the soldiers against disease.  There was no Louis Pasteur in 1335.  Likewise, there was no Louis Pasteur for cats, dogs, hyenas or any other animal 10,000 years ago.
17. Ditch the media.  Free speech is important, but there are limits.  You aren’t allowed to yell “fire” in a crowded movie theater unless there is a fire.  Encourage the media to talk about people who have done good things for society.  That will lift people’s spirts and elevate their immunity.
18. Ditch the politicians.  When the shit hits the fan, it’s time for the politicos to stand aside.  This is wartime, baby.  There was a point in the Civil War when Lincoln made a few suggestions to Grant on tactics.  Grant wisely, calmly and diplomatically stated that he didn’t think that those suggestions were good ideas.  
19. Relax.  Go out with the family and enjoy yourself. Face the world with courage. It’s better to die on your feet than to live the rest of your life on your knees.  Courage will make you feel better; besides your fear often becomes you.
20. Our National Anthem, for which we should all stand, for many reasons, not least of which is because our ancestors formed this country because they had spent a lifetime kneeling before monarchs, has as its last measure:  “… O’er the land of the free and the home of brave.”  Are we?  
21. Remember that things are never as bad or as good as we make them out to be.

Success isn’t a pipe dream; it’s a series of slow steps taken methodically.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley, MD

McAllen, TX 

Sunday, July 26, 2020

Copyright 2020   Archer Crosley   All Rights Reserved

The medical war zone is here.

After a long delay, it has resurfaced in McAllen, Texas.

I thought the medical war zone was a fraud back in March; I think it’s a fraud today.

Back in March, the medical war zone was all the rage; it was used to sell the disease.

The authorities kept talking about the medical war zone as if the virus was responsible for its existence.

Not so.

The medical war zone is a function of humanity and government; it is not a function of the virus.

The virus has no ability to direct patients to one facility or another. The virus cannot provide (or not provide) personal protective equipment.   The virus cannot pack an extraordinary number of patients into a small area. 

These actions lie within the province of man.

The virus only knows how to kill.

Nevertheless, there it was – the medical war zone.  The media was only too happy to give it air time. 

For a solid month we were told of the horrors of the medical war zone from all countries around the globe.

Do you think there was any collusion there?

Then shortly after New York City started to quiet down in June, the surge begin in Texas.  

Seemingly the carnival barkers in NYC loaded up their potions, pills and remedies into their Conestoga wagons and headed for the greener pastures of McAllen where they would be far from prying eyes.

Here they could work their magic – again.

What we see here is much of the same nonsense that was going on in New York City.

Living within the community, I have heard dark talk of less than optimal care.  Postings exist on Facebook of shoddy care.  These concerns are not made up. People are talking.

I’ve heard the concerns myself straight from nurses who have worked in the hospitals.

Naturally denials are forthcoming from politicians.  Yet, why should local and state representatives be  rushing to issue immediate denials?  Isn’t their first responsibility to the people?

I think so.

Along with these rumblings come the reports of the medical war zone.  The local media is only too happy to play it up.

Yet, as stated previously, this war zone exists by choice.

We are in the summer months.  The hospital census is naturally low.  

There should be plenty of space for all the patients.  Of course there’s not plenty of space if you decide to not utilize that space.

We hear reports of hospitals busting at the seams; but this is a common event during the winter, and yet the media never plays that up.

Why now is hospital capacity so important to the media?

Well, it is important if your goal is to hype up a crisis.  

We know for a stone cold fact that the hospitals are getting huge incentives for diagnosing coronavirus. Part of that diagnosis is the death certificate.

Even if we didn’t have hard evidence that the hospitals were getting reimbursed higher for coronavirus, we could certainly suspect it when we discover that the hospitals are paying nurses $2500 a day to take care of coronavirus patients.

Higher reimbursement equals higher diagnosis; that’s a law of Texas Medicare.

Other pieces of information that I have discovered is that nurses have been brought in by the federal government with their credentials rubber-stamped.  In other words, they are unknown to the local community.

Doctors have been brought in also.  Have their credentials been rubber-stamped as well?  I assume so.  If so, who are these doctors?  Are they licensed physicians?  Where did they train?  Where did they come from? How many of them are intensivists?

These are important questions to ask in the midst of a surge.

Of course, we are told that these imported providers were necessary because we are in a medical war zone.  But are we in a medical war zone because of the virus, or because we chose to manufacture a medical war zone?

You see, the imported nurses and doctors are essential to creating the illusion of the war zone.

Now, of course, there is no getting around the fact that people are being admitted to the hospital.  

But do the people who are being admitted need to be admitted?

How much reimbursement does the hospital get for each admission?  Are administrators pushing the ER doctors to admit more people?

How many of these admissions are for anxiety?

How many of these admissions are for regular pneumonia?

How many of these admissions are because the ER doctor wants to play it safe?

Every person admitted contributes to the medical war zone effect.

Once admitted, how many people need to be on a vent?  How much money does the hospital make for a patient being on a vent?

How aggressive is the treatment?  How does the treatment here stack up against other locales in different states and other countries around the globe?

Are there any disturbing trends?

Are local doctors permitted to review the charts?

These are questions best asked when the medical war zone comes to town.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley

McAllen, Texas

7/24/2020

Copyright 2020   Archer Crosley   All Rights Reserved

This article is written to expose various myths about the coronavirus. I am responding to an article in Vox by Nicolo Narea on July 23, 2020.

Her article is neutrally labeled:  How politics, inequity, and complacency undermined Texas’s fight against COVID-19.

Well …

In no particular order of importance, I will cover various arguments that she tries to make in her article.

1  Once again we see the argument that the reason why Texas had a spike in cases and deaths is because Texas reopened too early.  Sorry, that’s not an argument at all. It’s more a statement of fact. Attributing the spike in cases and deaths to an early reopening is like saying that the reason why John Kennedy was shot in Dealey Plaza was because he entered Dealey Plaza at 12:28 PM in the afternoon. 

Now, this is a clever argument because your authorities want you to stop right there. That’s right, they want you to stop your thinking right there. “Aha, you see, that’s the reason why there are so many cases; it’s clear now that Texas reopened too early.” 

That’s not a good answer. You would have to link that early re-opening to a physical event that is going on with the immunity of the community.  

Likewise, if New York City which had a lengthier reopening, does not see a surge, you would have to link that lengthy re-opening with the physical events that are going on with the immunity of the community; that is to say, you would have to conclude that some sort of herd immunity had developed in New York City.  

“But wait a minute, Jasper, if herd immunity did develop in New York City, then, why do we need a vaccine?” 

Aha, but you see, the authorities don’t want you to make that conclusion.  They would prefer that you stop short and attribute the increase in cases to Texas reopening too early – which says absolutely nothing.

2  Once again we see a focus on the surge of cases in Texas.  Now, I don’t look at the surge of cases as a bad thing; I view the surge of cases as a good thing. Let’s look at the glass half full, not half empty. If we are having a surge of cases, that indicates that we are spreading the virus around. That’s exactly what we want when it comes to young people.  We want young people to spread the virus around; and the more we do it the better.  

The only safe way to develop immunity at this point in time is herd immunity.  We do not have a vaccine. There is no guarantee that we will have a safe vaccine. Until that point in time the prudent course of action is to develop herd immunity.

The media though is fixated on the number of cases as a bad thing.  This is not good for us, because it’s scaring people into their houses. That’s not what we want.  We want people to exchange the virus.  

And, no, you are not saving lives by hiding inside your house. You are actually increasing the number of people who will die because you are not developing herd immunity.  

Let’s do the simple math. The number of elderly people never goes down. Every single day new people move into the elderly age bracket. That number always goes up. There is a huge baby factory pushing them up.  The virus is not going away. It’s hanging outside your door. If you do not develop herd immunity, the virus will always find it easier to find new elderly people to infect.  

3  The author focuses on a racial aspect. She states that Hispanics are being affected disproportionately in Texas. Well, this might be true, but I don’t know if that’s true; and she doesn’t either.  She states that Hispanics make up 40% of the deaths.  What she doesn’t point out is that 39.6% of the population is Hispanic-Latino (of any race).  Clearly, though, the RGV is getting hit, but there may be other factors involved.  We’ll have to wait and see before jumping to conclusions.

4  Texas has a culture focused on individualism.  Yes, that’s the reason right there why there is a spike in cases; it’s clear.  If only Texas had been Marxist and looked out for the public good, like all those Jacobins in New York City, everything would be fine.  Well, the last time I checked, the young people in New York City were human beings; and the last time I checked the news, which was a few moments ago, the young people in New York City were engaging in massive parties.  

The other day the governor was complaining about a party in which 700 unmasked New Yorkers were reveling.  Are these young people more responsive to the public good than Texans?  Why just a few weeks ago, they were tearing down statues of Columbus, were they not?  

So will all these young New Yorkers care for the public good by staying away from grandmother and grandfather?  What do you think?  I think not.  

So, if we see a surge in cases in NYC, that throws compassionate Marxism out the window; and if we don’t see a surge in cases, what does that say about herd immunity? 

Do you see you when I’m driving at here?  The authorities have boxed themselves into a corner.  So which will it be in NYC?  Surge or no surge?  A surge means the virus was always there and the lockdown did nothing.  No surge means that herd immunity is possible.

As stated previously in other columns, I’m betting that the authorities will go with surge and tell New Yorkers that they weren’t pure enough in thought.  Marxists always like to blame impure thinkers for the shortcomings in the prosecution of their nutty collectivist philosophy.

5  The author states that ambulances are parked outside the hospitals waiting for beds in temporary COVID-19 units.  She also states that crematoriums have weeks-long waiting lists.  Well, maybe what she says is so, but I haven’t seen any lines of ambulances, and I live very close to all the hospitals in McAllen.  I’ve even driven around there to do some scouting.  I wanted see what was going on.  

The death count in Hidalgo County isn’t as astronomical as you would expect.  I’ve tried to convince leaders that they are in a state of panic to no avail. I’ve tried to show them the numbers in an attempt to sober them up so that proper decisions are made.  In any given day in Hidalgo County we would expect 20 people to die.  If we look at the number of deaths that we would expect in Hidalgo County since March 15th we would multiply 0.00833 times 860,000 and arrive at a figure close to 20 people per day.  Today, July 24, we have 433 deaths.  There are 131 days between March 15 and July 24th.  We would thus expect a total of 2,620 deaths.  The death percentage from coronavirus is  thus 16% and that assumes that these are extra deaths and that these people wold not have died anyway.  It also assumes that these people legitimately died of the coronavirus.

Does this seem like a catastrophe to you?  Remember, at Antietam, the bloodiest day of the Civil War, 3500 people died in one day.

Now, with regard to crematoria, I find it hard to believe that bodies are stacking up for weeks on end. There are more funeral parlors down here than you can shake a stick at.  A cremation only takes one to three hours after a 48 hour waiting period.  

Well, that’s enough for today.  

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley, MD

Friday, July 24, 2020

Copyright 2020   Archer Crosley   All Rights Reserved

This is from Wikipedia.

There is a terrifying force that rules America.

It is pure evil, and it is as far away from the Founding Fathers’ vision of America as you can possibly get.

We should be afraid of this force.

No one in America should have to question its leadership. Yet in this battle against the coronavirus our leadership has forsaken us. It has intentionally harmed the people of the United States of America for no other reason save power.

This leadership has shamed itself.

There was a time in America when its citizens could take pride in their leadership.

No longer.

A leadership that denies its citizens hydroxychloroquine when there is clear evidence that it can help is a leadership that has abandoned spirituality and its people.

A leadership that denies the concept of herd immunity when it knows full well that there are only two ways to develop immunity against a virus and that one of those ways is today only a remote hope is a leadership that has abandoned spirituality and its people.

A leadership that promotes the idiotic protective ability of a face mask that goes against logical thinking and scientific studies is a leadership that has abandoned spirituality and its people.

A leadership that promotes locking people up in their houses knowing full well that those people have to come out of their houses someday to face the virus is a leadership that has abandoned spirituality and its people.

A leadership that hypes the pipe dream of a hastily prepared, possibly injurious vaccine as a panacea to the coronavirus is a leadership that has abandoned spirituality and its people.

A leadership that incentivizes the diagnosis of coronavirus so as to muddy the waters when it comes to studying the epidemiology  of the coronavirus is a leadership that has abandoned spirituality and its people.

A leadership that fails to follow basic epidemiological concepts in fighting the coronavirus is a leadership that has abandoned spirituality and its people.

This leadership needs to go.

Its performance goods beyond bad.

As Americans we’ve been indoctrinated to give our leaders the benefit of the doubt and assume that they’re just stupid.

But these mistakes in fighting then coronavirus go beyond stupid.

Nobody is that stupid.

These leaders are evil.

Sincerely,

Archer Crosley, MD

Wednesday, July 22, 2020

Copyright 2020   Archer Crosley   All Rights Reserved