| There are 44 comments on this blog. This blog is locked and no further comments are permitted. |
|
|
yet all the other studies say the opposite
|
|
|
What other studies? Everything to date has been anecdotal or suffered from very small sample sizes.
|
|
|
More details from the Associated Press. While not a randomized prospective clinical trial, this is the largest retrospective study to date.
"Researchers analyzed medical records of 368 male veterans hospitalized with confirmed coronavirus infection at Veterans Health Administration medical centers who died or were discharged by April 11.
About 28% who were given hydroxychloroquine plus usual care died, versus 11% of those getting routine care alone. About 22% of those getting the drug plus azithromycin died too, but the difference between that group and usual care was not considered large enough to rule out other factors that could have affected survival.
Hydroxychloroquine made no difference in the need for a breathing machine, either."
|
|
|
"The drug has long been known to have potentially serious side effects, including altering the heartbeat in a way that could lead to sudden death."
That can't be true. Otherwise, Trump wouldn't have said "It' a very strong, powerful medicine, but it doesn't kill people". He's a far more stable genius than any of those poindexters doing research.
|
|
|
^^^^ NEVER, that orange idiot is fuckin clueless as to what helps and what doesnt
|
|
|
@Al_Most_Perfect
Careful, you're likely to be taken seriously by some of these dumbfucks.
|
|
|
Sing that gospel, because medical journals are always right!
https://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/05/16/editor-in-chief-of-worlds-best-known-medical-journal-half-of-all-the-literature-is-false/
|
|
|
I'm just waiting for the moment when tRUMP gets super desperate and suggests that his cult45 enablers drink 8 ounces of bleach to beat COVID-19. Per the current rash of protest, we really need to have this Darwin moment.
|
|
|
Seems odd to me that this respected French researcher has extended his study to over 1000 patients and has a markedly different result set than the one referred to in this thread.
https://twitter.com/raoult_didier/status/1248541782289375232... Its in French so you egalitarian Liberals should have no problem deciphering the text while keeping the rube conservatives in the dark.
|
|
|
"Researchers analyzed medical records of 368 male veterans hospitalized with confirmed coronavirus infection at Veterans Health Administration medical centers who died or were discharged by April 11."
So these patients were not under the care of the Doctors or researchers that wrote the study? The patients were not necessarily under any agreed upon prescribed regiment? The Patients all were hospitalized male veterans with confirmed coronavirus cases.... Hmmm
Being a Veteran myself..... The VA is the healthcare provider of last resort for me and almost all Veterans I know. There are some that are fully retired that may avail themselves to the VA and for the most part are not in the best of shape when doing so.
I've pointed out 3 areas of concern with this information and I'm just eyeballing without going much into the detail. On the surface this appears to be cherry picked data that only seeks to argue against something rather than present useful information to the public.
|
|
|
I'm definitely NOT glad to hear that HC is ineffective.
However, it is important to have the facts. Otherwise, people may get a false sense of security that a "cure" is available.
|
|
|
The study is not conclusive. There is speculation that hydroxychloroquine is most effective before people get sick enough to go on ventilators. It may be too late once ARDS kicks in.
We need a large randomized controlled trial using this drug to study the effects directly on patients. There is one from NYU being done "at warp speed."
|
|
|
Regarding the false sense of security.... Isn't it just as dangerous to believe that nothing is effective?
How many people committed suicide for any number of reasons when diagnosed with Cancer, AIDS, Parkinsons, ALS and many more. People do need to know there are treatments or VARYING efficacy.
But that's ok its just the President that we try to make look bad not the Dr's who have said the same thing.
|
|
|
Re: the Didier Raoult study, this is the one where the editors of the journal it was published in sent out a statement saying that the study did not meet their standards.
It's been heavily criticized for it's poor design and sloppy analysis.
|
|
|
@Night-Rider You are correct sir that is why many healthcare professionals are using it as a prophylactic (you know that term!) measure.
good post
|
|
|
@wunanddun:
For any given individual, a false sense of security might be a good thing, if there is truly no other good news. But from a national Public Health perspective, it is REALLY IMPORTANT if a treatment works or not.
As for suicides, I doubt that there are many people that kill themselves because their prognosis of recovery is only 90-something percent.
The risk with HCQ is it might change that 90-something percent recovery rate to 80-something percent.
|
|
|
You mean the first study with under 100 patients? Not the latest study of over 1000.
|
|
|
He also addresses the concerns of those that call his study sloppy ... Saying that his level of care for the patient is more important than the standards of a study. I give him kudos for that. Others might kick him.
He's a Dr. for gods sake with promising results of a prescribed regimen he has been using since Hydroxychloroquine was ever uttered out of Trumps mouth, do you think he is somehow fudging with his numbers ? These are HIS patients not faceless hundreds picked to post an opposing opinion on something.
|
|
|
@PH, Obviously you are correct... about posing long term prognosis of those ailments I presented with this ... BUT some people would be sure to be in a category of sure death with their pre-existing conditions.
An overweight diabetic in Florida probably felt that way last week, he was intubated and requested the hydro treatment, he has fully recovered.
Just saying... even though you guys are tempering what you say.... Your posts belie your intentions.
|
|
|
I'm done
|
|
|
If a patient is truly at death's door, then I have no problem with him deciding to try HCQ as a last resort. This actually happens fairly frequently under the FDA's Humanitarian Device/Drug Exemption rules.
The problem is when large numbers of people insist on the drug with no clear evidence that it will help them. Statistically, most people with Covid-19 are going to get better on their own.
The main criticism of the 1000 patient study is the fact that it lacks a control arm. Efficacy is impossible to demonstrate with a control population.
|
|
|
It good to know the facts.
The administration's COVID-19 task force isn't betting the farm on that drug. They are openly promoting that the Bio-Tech sector work together to develop a variety of solutions.
This push on the private sector has been good. Abbott labs developed a quick test and another test might eclipse that. Other companies re-tooled to manufacture much needed masks. Supply and distribution issues where identified and Fed-Ex stepped up.
|
|
|
People react to all of the drugs based upon whether they hate or like Trump...The left is fucking deranged with this.
Trump said there was some information that this drug might be effective. There were positive signs. Lots of anecdotal evidence out there that is does work. No definitive longitudinal studies...not enough time to do so. But some evidence. Every drug has side effects and the drug shouldn't be administered under certain conditions.
Trump was trying to give the American people some hope....unlike the main stream media who have all of us dead by now......and we are now finding a number of drug options that might be effective. Whenever there is a new disease, we look to all possible cures.
Blaming Trump that someone had side effects from a drug is just total lunacy. He didn't say take the drug...he said results were encouraging.
But when you hate the guy, you will put words in his mouth and run with it.
|
|
|
There's a fine line between giving hope and lying to patients.
Trump jumps back and forth over that line so many times that it may as well not exist.
Don't forget, Trump told everyone (and his supporters mostly believed him) that the coronavirus would "miraculously" go away by April.
How's that working out for the economy now?
|
|
|
...He also said he hopes thats True....
Guess we aren't tempering what we say anymore.
|
|
|
And Doctors never manipulate study results to get the desired outcome for their self-serving purposes...
|
|
|
He wasn't lying to patients...he was encouraging the American people.
We all get the Trump haters...nothing he says or does is ever right.
He initiates a travel ban and he is racist.
He relates some positive results from a drug and everyone focuses on the side effects.
If he found the cure to cancer, you would be upset that he was being anti-cancer.
|
|
|
^^^ đź‘Ś
|
|
|
There are shady people of course, but the worse of them is trump by far.
|
|
|
He said he wanted to be a cheerleader. The problem is that he is supposed to be the quarterback.
Cheerleaders are window dressing, which is about how useful he is right now.
|
|
|
If Trump doesn't want to actually take the snap, let a real quarterback get in the game.
|
|
|
TDS
Orange Man Good or Orange Man Bad... With the bullshit media coverage of course more people are going to be prejudiced, poisoned and only see failure... Prejudice can't allow a tainted mind to see successes.
|
|
|
^^^^
|
|
|
When you do a study, you are looking for an effect of whatever you are studying.
The opposite of an effect is a null result, which is what we see in those 368 patients.
The VA study cannot prove that HCQ is ineffective. But, this study most certainly does not show that HCQ *is* effective. It's a subtle difference, but that is how you properly interpret data.
If the drug were any good, you would expect to see a statistically significant increase in positive outcomes relative to the control group. The argument would then shift to *how* effective it is and what is a safe and therapeutic does. What the study *does* strongly showsis that HCQ is about as effective as doing nothing (beyond the normal standard-of-care treatment). In fact, when used without azithromycin, HCQ actually appears to be harmful.
If HCQ is shown to be effective in the larger trials that are still being conducted, I'll be the first to admit I was wrong. In the meantime, the data does not lie.
|
|
|
Even Fox News can't put a positive spin on this study.
|
|
|
And it's probably good that FOX isn't trying to spin manure into gold
|
|
|
@ph. Have you even read how HCQ and Zpac works?Or what the strategy for using it is? I doubt it because any same person who reads what the treatment was about would say ...."Yeah that makes sense" the Zpac is to fight the initial infection with a powerful antibiotic, The HCQ is used as it was with SARS and other viruses of the corona family to lower PH. These viruses thrive at a certain PH level HCQ lowers that level and inhibits the virus from reproducing as rapidly as it would if the PH level remained the same. It's pretty simple actually. So with that reasoning in hand and in similar circumstances ircunstaces (SARS) no one argues its efficacy
Why would anyone say for lack of an alternative no fo t use that Trump poison on me. Its just stupid.
|
|
|
I still wouldn't conclude that hydroxycholoquine is not effective against COVID-19. The Chinese study done in February, that, unlike this study, was a randomized clinical trial showed that hydroxycholoquine reduced the time sick in patients that weren't severely sick with ARDS. The Chinese study was small, however. Future studies should consider testing not only the most severely sick patients but also high-risk patients before they become severely ill.
|
|
|
Here comes the cult member trump supporters with alternative “facts”
|
|
|
So hydroxychloroquine not working is a win for the left? Congrats?
|
|
|
If it hasn't already been obvious, the reason I brought Trump into the discussion was to shine a spotlight on the insanity of his supporters.
I know I'm not going to convince them, because they are already a lost cause. However, there are likely hundreds, maybe thousands, of rational people who might read this blog and realize how far out in the wilderness Trump supporters actually are. Those individuals, who do not want to get caught up in this debate, are the real target audience of this blog.
Every reputable news outlet, including Fox News has reported the results exactly as I did. A couple of hours ago, the NIH also specifically recommended *against* the use of HCQ/AZM for treatment. I'm not the one that is misrepresenting this study. Even Trump himself has backed away somewhat from his unfounded claims, because he's already gotten the benefit of his gaslighting. He's managed to fool his base (not terribly difficult, admittedly) into ignoring how he totally fucked everything up.
Yet the Trump crowd continues to believe in him, because they can't cope with the thought that their Dear Leader might be wrong. If you have ever wondered how the Reverend Jim Jones got 900 people to drink the cyanide-laced Kool aid, you are seeing it play out in real time.
|
|
|
Your just catfishing? Really !? You seem to think that "study" sounded pretty definitive.
|
|
|
@PH
The VA study has not been certified by any peer reviews or published in any scholarly medical journal. The first paragraph of the preprint server that posted the so called "study" says in bold print that "Preprints are preliminary reports of work that have not been certified by peer review. They should not be relied on to guide clinical practice or health-related behavior and should not be reported in news media as established information." In the scientific research community, this means that the study is not anything you can draw conclusions from in its current status.
The news media has zero credibility when they post unverified information like this. In addition, the media failed to point out the the "study" stated "Baseline demographic and comorbidity characteristics were comparable across the three treatment groups. However, hydroxychloroquine, with or without azithromycin, was more likely to be prescribed to patients with more severe disease, as assessed by baseline ventilatory status and metabolic and hematologic parameters. Thus, as expected, increased mortality was observed in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine, both with and without azithromycin." This means that the drugs were given to the patients with severe comorbidities (i.e cardiovascular and lung disease) that were very likely to die with or without the treatment. Read the actual study linked below to see how the patients were even before having Covid-19.
|
|
|
It's a game changer and will be available to everyone in a very short period of time. Time that is not long but short. Many people have told me that and that is my opinion. This will save the world, or not but still very much a game changer until it isn't, but that's OK until a shinny object catches my attention.
|
| There are 44 comments on this blog. This blog is locked and no further comments are permitted. |
