No one's talking about a scientifically researched method to cure illness. They're talking about an off-the-cuff dumb remark from someone unqualified and not educated enough to make such claims. Instead of trying to shift the topic and get off the point, are you saying you're in agreement that injecting cleaning products directly into your body as the President says would be helpful?

The idea first came from Wilhelm Conrad Roentgen, a German scientist with a strong background in physics.  

Unlike disinfectants, which had been used in some form since 800 BC as described in the Odyssey, which has existed in its current chlorine based form since the 1700s, and  which we have a great deal of understanding about, radiation of those frequencies was not yet known to be harmful.  As Roentgen was STUDYING X-Rays, he noted their unique interactions with cathode ray tubes.  Based on the unique way the tubes were illuminated, he began to develop a process to illuminate the body in the same way using X-Rays.  Once we knew X-Rays could pass through the body in the same way, people began researching therapeutic uses for X-Rays.  The knowledge that x-rays and other similar forms of radiation could cause cancer was discovered around the same time that it was discovered that it could be effectively used as a therapy for cancer.

The difference here, obviously, is that on the one hand you have scientists actually researching how a largely unknown new discovery could be used, and only suggesting its use AFTER researching it, and having reason to believe it was a potential treatment.  Prior to this research, they had no knowledge of the risks involved.  The researchers did not have the benefit of being able to appeal to experts on the subject to see how the treatment may work.  They were not idiotic because they were researching in the best way they could, guided by those most knowledgable on the topic, in light of incredibly limited knowledge base in a new field.

On the other hand, we have a moron suggesting using a substance that has existed for hundreds of years, and we know a hell of a lot about, in a way that is known to be incredibly dangerous, and known not to function in the way suggested.  This is despite having access to experts on virology and medicine who could have told him it was a very very bad idea, and in fact had to make several public statements afterwards to tell people not to do that.  He is an idiot because he's speaking out of ass suggesting dumbass things in spite of a massive knowledge base about disinfectants that he could have consulted.  He should accordingly be ridiculed and demeaned.  Comparing this to the process of scientific inquiry is laughably absurd.

It really has.

It was implied by others that Trump was saying that people should be injecting themselves with disinfectants. He simply asked if that was possible then suggested the medical doctors may want to take a look at that, and there was no response one way or another from them as far as I could hear.

Not being 100% certain of everything means someone is uneducated?

It's common sense? What about how stupid most people are in general, as you said?

Trump was bragging and praising himself about asking the question? When?

The entire world is laughing at America? The, entire, world? I'd ask how certain you were, but common sense tells me... though my stupidity...

If it was saving lives right now you would presume Trump would've been made aware, so there would be no reason to ask.

Hydroxychloroquine is helping to save some lives as far as I've seen.

Some people do dumb things, yes. I'm not going to point out what the opposition has led some people to do. If people in general are stupid, again as you stated, then surely some are really dumb, and so because a few may make a terrible decision because of that, nobody with any type of widespread reach should say anything at all, considering it could potentially lead to someone hurting themselves?

Since when does someone asking questions make them all knowing? If someone was taught that, it's the teachers fault, not someone else's.

Trump does act like that at times, so if both can't go together, he should pick one, and so should anyone pointing out what they find negative about him, and it can't be that he's a moron but also a genius. It goes both ways.

People follow him, but he also represents them? The people who are stupid in general? And their leader should be a perfect genius?

There's still many things we don't know. Do we truly know everything there is to know about chemistry and the human body today?

When people are so stupid in general, 'educated' people have to elaborate.

Trumps not a scientist and he didn't suggest using it, he asked if it could be. Everything can be dangerous if you look at it that way.

Trumps not the most presidential speaker. He also could be more clear at times. Every leader has flaws, and some flaws are much worse than others. Some training probably wouldn't hurt, though it would never be enough anyway, which is probably why he wouldn't bother.

He asked a question. The only polite suggestion was for the medical doctors to look into it possibly. Leaving it to the professionals.

That seems pretty discriminatory towards someone's religion, so I'm not going to touch this one.

Holding people accountable is necessary, to whatever degree, when they rightfully deserve it.

How did they scientifically research it, before questioning if it was worth looking into in the first place? Was anyone negatively impacted?

I'd like to know a concrete answer, yes. If it's potentially useful and can be worked on, great, if it's not, then no big deal.

The difference is not all scientists knew. Did every single scientist globally, know about the exact same findings? Do they all know what is and isn't possible now? Have people in the past been harmed because the information wasn't known be all? Are people harmed now because of medical mistakes or simply being the rare occurrence of a negative reaction to a treatment? Has anyone ever been harmed because a scientist asked a question or suggested research based on an idea?

Not all science is perfect, and neither is leadership. Should some of us think science and the people who use it are stupid and idiotic because of what harm it's caused? Science = bad because one person was hurt though many were saved? Should we spend all day everyday going out of our way to bash science? Quite a negative way to look at things I'd say.

We have someone who doesn't know something, asking a question, and suggesting the professionals potentially look into it if there's any reason to. If that's such a terrible thing, then I don't even know why anyone bothers.

Been thinking a bit about the latest Trump defense: basically that he's just asking questions so it's no be deal. The issue I have with that is that Trump has set up his administration in such a way that he can't be told he's asking a stupid question. If someone is in a biology class and they ask the teacher "why can't we use things like bleach to cure disease since it gets rid of viruses on surfaces?" then the teacher can explain why that wouldn't work and the faulty reasoning behind the suggestion. Instead in this case you have the president asking his administration and his administration just going "yeah we'll look into that sir". I wouldn't mind the question if the response was "oh no that won't work because bleach doesn't discriminate between human and virus in how it kills things so that would be too harmful to the host". That would be alright because you ask a dumb question and you get an immediate answer for why it won't work. Instead you have a stupid question that's left hanging, and that gives the idea legitimacy to those who don't know better which is what leads to dangerous situations and misunderstandings.

An immediate concrete answer would have been best. It would also be nice if the world was nothing but immediate concrete answers to all questions for everyone. Maybe everyone should write down or record every question that comes to mind and hope when they eventually ask it that's it's widely agreed upon to be the right way at the right time. That's not how the world works though in reality, unfortunately.

Can we have a "Trump" official thread? because I feel like every off-topic thread turns into a Trump thread. I really didn't expect this one to follow suit and it's getting harder to scroll through Tump's posts just to get COVID19 relevant ones.

Again, you're avoiding the point by asking a series of abstract questions bearing pretty much no relevance to the actual topic.

The risks inherent in studying the unknown are not comparable with suggesting something that is patently idiotic in light of what we actually do know.  And while there is nothing wrong with asking questions, there is something very wrong when someone who is in a position of authority in the situation hasn't educated himself enough to know what he is suggesting is a terrible idea. 

This isn't about an ideal world where there are always experts around that can give concrete answers to dumb questions. The people that have the concrete answers were there, they just didn't want to annoy the baby-in-chief. And when the dumb question is being broadcast to the entire country that's not good. From what I've read Trump is now saying he was being sarcastic (or at least the administration is) and based on how he ran out before questions during yesterday's press briefing it doesn't seem like he wants to clear up any misunderstandings. So again this all fits with the model I have:

1. Trump is dumb and he gets easily annoyed when told he said something dumb.

2. Trump has been vindictive in the past with his firings so those around him don't want to speak up even when he says something mind numbingly stupid. 

Who asked the questions that led to nuclear findings? Who made suggestions based on those? What is something immensely destructive we have today that could end the world multiple times over? What started and led to that?

If the scientists knew what nuclear findings would lead to, would they will have asked the questions and made the suggestions? Did they have any authority? Were they not educated enough, even as they learned?

Does anyone know everything and do some hold back what should have been said or asked, which leads to negative consequences for others?

And no administration is ideal either, which is what this is supposed to be about, correct?

Trump has his issues like all leaders have. Trump seems to be vindictive at times, but sometimes people keep quiet to stop themselves from looking worse for their own good. Nobodies perfect.