I have been concerned that face masks for non-first-responders would shift vital protective resources away from first-responders and that would give some people a false sense of security. As a physician, I think the time has come to put those concerns aside.

Last week Arizona Governor Doug Ducey exercised his best judgment, aiming to expand the scope of the health care workforce during the COVID-19 public health emergency. And yet health care practitioners lack the same ability, based upon their knowledge and their patients’ circumstances, to use their best judgment when treating pain.

Remdesivir, an antiviral drug that many are pinning their hopes on to help solve this pandemic nightmare, is now being tested in hundreds of trials. Results are expected within weeks. But the drug has already been tested in monkeys. And it worked.

As non-essential businesses were lock-down over the last few weeks, the regulatory line between essential and non-essential got fuzzy. Some essential services are no-brainers, pharmacies, grocery and food markets, logistical systems, and of course, healthcare facilities. Other businesses were not so lucky, involving crowds that could not be effectively physically distanced – movie theaters and gyms come to mind. And then, of course, there are those grey area businesses.

Would the widespread wearing of face masks decrease the spread of coronavirus and COVID-19? Unfortunately, there is no clear-cut right or wrong answer to the raging face mask debate. If there is any benefit, it probably lies in protecting the public from a potentially infected wearer rather than the wearer from a potentially infected public.

Just when you thought the pandemic of misinformation could not get worse, Rudy Giuliani, President Trump's personal attorney, surfaces to add his misinformative spin. His website has two video presentations on suspect therapies for COVID-19. Let's consider them in turn.

Two of the experimental coronavirus drugs, chloroquine, and hydroxychloroquine are a breeze to synthesize. But remdesivir, possibly the most promising candidate, is anything but. It's a royal pain. Here's why.

As we get used to sheltering in place, speculation turns to an exit strategy. Especially impatient are those most concerned with the economy. If you follow COVID-19 coverage, there are any number of possible approaches going forward.

On Rachel Maddow's MSNBC show, New York Times science and health reporter Donald McNeil praised China's mass quarantine camps as the best way to fight the COVID-19 pandemic. A CBC documentary reveals what that policy entails: Citizens are literally being dragged out of their homes as they cry and scream. Others have their doors welded shut.

When coronavirus patients are admitted to all general hospitals, the risk of infecting other patients as well as hospital personnel is a serious concern. One way to address this problem is to consider isolating coronavirus patients to certain designated medical centers thus reducing the likelihood of exposure to other patients and their attending medical staff.