A peer-reviewed study measuring the effectiveness of a controversial drug cocktail that includes hydroxychloroquine concluded that the treatment lowered hospitalizations and mortality rates of coronavirus patients.
The study, set to be published in the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents in December, determined that “Low-dose hydroxychloroquine combined with zinc and azithromycin was an effective therapeutic approach against COVID-19.”
A total of 141 patients diagnosed with the coronavirus were treated with the three-drug cocktail over a period of five days and compared to a control group of 377 people who tested positive for the virus but were not given the treatment.
The study found that “the odds of hospitalisation of treated patients was 84% less than in the untreated patients,” and only one patient died from the group being treated with the drugs compared to 13 deaths in the untreated group.
Hydroxychloroquine became a controversial issue during the height of the coronavirus pandemic when President Trump championed the drug as an effective coronavirus treatment, which immediately drew criticism from the media and several health experts.
Twitter censored a video over the summer showing doctors touting the effectiveness of the drug.
Additionally, a July study conducted by the Henry Ford Health System in Michigan concluded that patients taking hydroxychloroquine were more likely to survive the coronavirus.
Gosh. Looks like all that controversy over the drug was for naught.
Maybe it's just me, but sometimes, it almost seems like the press has an agenda that goes beyond just reporting news. Anyone else notice?
I immediately skip any article published by Newsmax. They go beyond the left bias of the NYT or the right bias of the WSJ. The lie all the time.
I am absolutely certain you think so.
"I immediately skip any article published by Newsmax. They go beyond the left bias of the NYT or the right bias of the WSJ. The lie all the time."
joj,
I'm aware of the sources too. The Washington Times and The Blaze. Somebody passed that on to me in an email yesterday. However, I did not ignore it because it wasn't on my favorite news sources. Sometimes, the less covered news is actually less covered because they are trying to hide it or censor it from us, which is exactly the case here.
I note that this article never appeared on some of your favorites, NYT, WOP and CNN. It's peer reviewed science. Suit yourself if you only want to believe in news that comes from liberal sources and you come here to convince everybody of it.
I appreciate you just as much because you do exactly that. You make tons of wonderful points from the left side that help round this place out and I agree with.
I also have a very personal story about hydroxychloroquine that just played out in the last month that I was getting ready to share and this made for the perfect opportunity. I hope that you will not be as equally closed minded because it has to do with this same topic. It's 100% factual and I am the source, not a right leaning news organization.
At Thanksgiving, my daughter Shani-41 had our immediate Evansville family over. My wife-62 and I-almost 65, youngest son Mac-30, oldest son Quinn-32 and his wife Carrie-29 as of yesterday.
Shani and her husband Jovan-40 have 3 kids(our grand kids)
I have everyones ages because Shani is a geriatrics occupation therapist that is in charge of almost a dozen skilled nursing facilities in the state of Indiana and is very concerned about protecting my wife and I, since she has seen what COVID does to older people at her many facilities. Shani will be getting the COVID vaccine tomorrow, then a booster shot 29 days after that. She can't wait!
Your age matters a great deal if you get COVID. So does your health, immune system and TREATMENT.
Young people can mostly survive after they get COVID, some are even asymptomatic. However, this is many times more severe than the flu. If you are older and get COVID, even in good health, your life is at risk. My wife and I have a couple of health issues. It would not be surprising for one of us to die if we got COVID.
Our daughter knows this and was apprehensive about even having Thanksgiving at her house but did it. Same thing with Christmas coming up, this time at our house.
Our daughter in law, Carrie and Quinn went to her parents house for Thanksgiving just before joining us at my daughters house. Turns out that every person at Carries parents house got COVID(except for our son/her husband, Quinn, who we assumed had it in October because he was sick and tested positive for COVID). Her dad had it and they didn't know yet and we think that he was the superspreader to everybody there.
So when Carrie came to our celebration, she had just been infected hours earlier at her parents house..........but not shedding virus yet, fortunately. 2 days later when we found out she and her family all had COVID, and she went to our family's Thanksgiving after that...........we all got tested and got negatives, with no symptoms. Wheeew! If she had been infected a couple days earlier, much of our family might have got COVID.
So now you know the setting for this COVID outbreak. Here's how it went for Carrie and her husband Quinn.
Carrie's boss had just had COVID the previous month. His dad is a cardio-thoracic surgeon in the Detroit area and when her boss, Alex got COVID, his dad prescribed him hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin and steroids and he recovered quickly.
So the day Carrie tested positive, Alex's dad called her in the same drugs, hydroxychloroquine, Z-pack and steroids and within a couple of days, she was already much better. The following week, she was back to work(I thought too early). But the big surprise was that when she was much recovered, Quinn, her husband came down with COVID. How could this be if he had it in October with the positive test? We are not sure if it was a false positive or not then but there is no doubt that he had it REAL Bad this time.
Quinn quickly got worse and it turned into something that alot of people would have been hospitalized for. I left messages with him for days that were unreturned to tell him to take any meds left over from Carrie. He said that he was sleeping for something like 22 hours/day, had a 102 fever for 5 days, extremely sore throat, lost his sense of smell and felt like he was going to die.
I left some of my steroids to modulate his immune system(to control the cytokine storms that kill many people in the later stages), as well as mega dose zinc on his front porch that he started taking at day 5.
He was starting to get a bit better but not like his wife did on the other meds, and we were concerned that if it started getting worse again, it could be fatal. So we got the same doctor, to prescribe him the same things.
Within 2 days of taking the new meds, his improvement was massive and he went back to work in the middle of this past week. He still says he feels like he weighs 500 lbs walking around but at least he's much better.
If he had gone on the meds sooner, maybe he would not have been so bad???
So how much did the hydroxychloroquine play a role in the recovery? We can't know for sure but the reason I have been a huge fan of its use before this, is that I studied how the drug works, as a scientist for several months this Spring/Summer and clearly it would help fight COVID based on authentic medicine/science. I'll post that below, later today.
This is why thousands of doctors have been prescribing it across the world, many in our country. They don't get their medicine from the NYT's WOP or CNN. Their profession is to save lives, not practice politics.
joj, hopefully, you will never get COVID but if you do, I hope that you will not let the sources that you use to form opinions kill you. This is a deadly disease as you know. I can tell you unequivocally as a scientist why hydroxychloroquine works and watched it work on 3 people that I know who used it. And its a safe drug, unless possibly if you have a heart arrhythmia(which I do but I would still take it).
pj, who is an extremely smart man(a rocket scientist of sorts) continued to insist that my opinion earlier this year on HQ was because I was "blinded by the clown" and had BBTC syndrome. Sadly, he hates Trump and because of that could not entertain the possibility that Trump could right on this and anybody that agreed with Trump must be wrong..........for the sole reason that it agreed with Trump and the truth about the drug has been censored by the MSM.............because it supported Trump.
Fortunately, I don't get my truths from the MSM. I do the lengthy scientific homework/research with an open mind and come to independent conclusions and give Trump's view exactly ZERO weighting. In fact, when he says it/something, I immediately start looking for reasons for why he's wrong.............and they are usually easy to find.
But sometimes..............he's actually right.
This is one of them.
If you get COVID, find a doctor that will prescribe the medicines above and take high doses of zinc. They have found that many of the patients with bad outcomes had zinc deficiencies.
Mega dose Vit. D is probably a good idea too.
There are other good treatments. Carrie's Dad, who is almost my age and was doing poorly, received a blood infusion of the antibodies and recovered pretty quickly after that. There are also some anti viral drugs, like the one that President Trump took but are not always available and not cheap.
And please learn a lesson, even if you never get COVID. If the MSM was truly honest/objective and had your best interest at heart, they would not be covering up a life saving medical treatment that is saving lives...........because it doesn't support their political agenda.
Don't let their political agenda and convincing sounding narratives capture your brains so that you become one with their belief systems.
Look at all information from both sides and first, verify that it's good or no good.........not by checking it against your favorite, usually biased sources that will give you the answers you want to read but with an objective starting position that can allow authentic information to get in..................no matter who/what the source is, no matter how crazy it sounds(it usually sounds crazy, just because we disagree with it).
People that go around just reinforcing what they think that they know................don't learn very much in life compared to...........people that going around questioning what they think they know. Only then can you discover when you are wrong and as a consequence...........learn new things.
This was one of the threads back in the Summer when I was making the case for HQ based on the authentic science/facts.
pj decided to stop coming here because of it.
Trump touts HCQ again and wacko doc who promotes it
24 responses |
Started by pj - July 28, 2020, 10:49 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/56930/
Lot's more here:
Trump-touted COVID-19 drug hydroxychloroquine works
18 responses |
Started by metmike - July 3, 2020, 8:07 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/55059/
AND HERE:
Previous threads on this topic:
Scientists/academics-On the “science” of COVID
15 responses |
Started by metmike - May 31, 2020, 2:40 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/53061/
Trump’s taking hydroxychloroquine (and he could cause alot of deaths)
Started by metmike - May 18, 2020, 7:30 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/52380/
FDA approves COVID-19 fighting drugs
15 responses |
Started by metmike - March 30, 2020, 11 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/49777/
This is another drug that has been proven to help:
https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2007764
Patients in the remdesivir group had a shorter time to recovery than patients in the placebo group (median, 10 days, as compared with 15 days; rate ratio for recovery, 1.29; 95% confidence interval
The odds of improvement in the ordinal scale score were higher in the remdesivir group, as determined by a proportional odds model at the day 15 visit
Kaplan–Meier estimates of mortality by day 15 were 6.7% in the remdesivir group and 11.9% in the placebo group
Patients in the remdesivir group had a shorter time to improvement of one or of two categories on the ordinal scale from baseline than patients in the placebo group (one-category improvement: median, 7 vs. 9 days;
mm: For someone who claims to be a scientist and rely on facts, it still surprises me that you still seem so willing to rely on anecdotal evidence and ignore the results of the numerous studies that found no benefit (but rather possible negative cardiac side effects) when it comes to HCQ .
"On the balance of probability, unless higher doses are tested in ongoing trials, there appears little cause for optimism in repurposing either CQ or HCQ, with or without AZM, to fight COVID‐19 pandemic. The resulting discontinuation of HCQ from major large studies effectively marks the end of repurposing CQ or HCQ for combating COVID‐19" https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcpt.13267
When Trump got Covid, apparently even his doctors didn't recommend HCQ, as there was no mention of his taking it, when the medications he was taking were made public. Plus, he said nothing about HCQ (which he most certainly would have), but rather credited the monoclonal antibody treatment, remdesivir and steroids he received, for his speedy recovery.
Given the current surge in hospitalizations/shortage of ICU beds and the ever-rising death toll, if HCQ was really effective, wouldn’t you think doctors, patients and others would be clamoring for its wide-spread use?
I know you’re very aware of confirmation bias, you’ve warned about it many times on mf. But it sure seems you may well have it, when it comes to HCQ.
Yippee! It's wonderful to see you again pj!
We missed you! Seriously, I hope that you stick around even though we disagree completely on this issue.
So this peer review study does not count as science for you pj?
Or the other one I posted earlier this year?
Or the fact that many hundreds of doctors continue to prescribe it in the US and thousands in the world?
Or because you didn't know about these things above because of the MSM's censoring of the above information and smearing the drug because Trump touted it?
Like I keep telling you, I could care less what Trump says or does, I use objective science. Your pointing out that Trump didn't take it and that should somehow affect my position on hydroxychloroquine, keeps assuming that I care what Trump says or does on anything related to science(other than him pulling out of the Climate Accord-which was a good thing but the Climate Accord is all about politics not science)
You seem to think that because Trump didn't take it, all the objective evidence that I keep showing means nothing. Please try to pretend that Donald Trump was never born and start over on your thinking here.
I actually hadn't thought much about this drug for a couple of months.......... until my daughter in law and wife's boss, Alex got COVID(they both work at PBTT Plating, where my wife is the plant manager) and his dad, a cardiothoracic surgeon, prescribed HQ, along with steroids and a z-pack for him (Alex) and he got well pretty quickly.
When my daughter in law got COVID this doctor called her in a prescription from MI(we live in IN) not because she even asked for it but because her boss wanted her to have what his dad has prescribed to numerous other patients, mostly in MI but some in OH, PA and now IN.
This doctor also has a practice doing plastic surgery and is extraordinarily brilliant at both his jobs. Last Christmas, when we were in Detroit visiting my dad, for a Christmas present from him to my wife and daughter in law, he did 10,000 worth of plastic surgery on their faces(chins, eyes and skin).
So I am just reporting to you the facts pj. I already showed you how some of those previous studies that you believe were bogus. Look at the previous discussions, its all there very clearly stated.
The topic of this drug has turned very political..............which is why I did my own research on how and why it works to have a similar understanding that medical doctors have............that are prescribing it.
Here's a couple of other studies:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/10/26/remdesivir-for-covid-19-study-accidentally-proved-effectiveness-of-hydroxychloroquine/
A new study of over 2000 hospitalized patients reveals that Hydroxychloroquine works very well in treatment of COVID. The reason I’m so excited about this one is because unlike the poor studies that I’ve written about already, this study controlled the dosages, use the correct levels of HCQ and Azythromycin per other studies, and matched patients to each other by their own health situations. This matching of health condition is the proper method to control the confounding factors in a situation where testing cannot be double-blind. The health of the patient is what the frustratingly fake studies didn’t correct for, but certain political pressures made them popular.
This is absolutely the most conclusive research produced to date by anyone, due mostly to the quality of the approach. No one has published this quality level of work on HCQ on humans prior to this.
pj,
What amazes me most is that you are concluding from all of this pretty dang convincing evidence, that its just my cognitive bias and has something to do with President Trump(for me).
If me or my wife get COVID, I will want HQ, especially for me as it would probably also help with my autoimmune disorder that I've been taking prednisone for the past 26 years...........it could kill 2 birds with one stone!
Besides effectively treating lupus and RA, HQ has been shown to treat other autoimmune issues based on its ability to modulate the immune and inflammation response.
This is just science/medicine.
http://www.gidoctor.net/hydro-crohns-ulcerative.php
mm: So how come with so many new cases, hospitalizations and deaths, why isn't being widely used? Why no big public outcry that be used?
Why do you ignore the numerous studies including those in the link I provided that showed it's inefficacy and lead to the FDA to rescind its emergency use and not even think it warranted further trials ?
If it works why not a big push by some entity now for more trials to prove it?
Why didn't they give it to Trump?
If it is effective and is being used successfully, why are so many still dying?
All because the media that's anti-Trump has suppressed reports of its success? That seems a little hard to believe.
pj,
Do you even read my stuff?
I have answered those questions, most of them more than once and a couple of them half a dozen times.
This will help you:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/62920/#62966
mm: I do read your "stuff" and just reread it (some of the links are circular, leading back to the same post), but don't see how it answers most of the questions I raised. And don't see how you possibly could have "answered those questions, most of them more than once and a couple of them half a dozen times" Since I haven't been on mf in months and most of the questions I raised relate to the current state of things, the current surge in Covid , Trump's non use etc.
Once again it seems best, I just let this topic slide, and maybe mf in general, so as to avoid raising our respective blood pressures.
So I may have time on Sunday to cut and paste those answers from previous posts back to you pj.
I was seriously not blowing you off earlier but since you seem to be unable to find the answers, I seriously want to make sure you get them.
So count on it. I’ll try to throw in new stuff to make it more clear.
Question for you.
Do you understand how hydroxychloquine works?
I also explained it to you before but am guessing either you forgot or ignored the explanation/answer.
If not, how do you think that it works?
You put up lots of arguments in favor of HQ, but you didn't answer pj's questions.
Similarly, you went on and on about how we agreed on much about the election results not being proven to be fraudulent, with pages and pages of stuff (often repetitive), but never answered my question of how you would describe Trump asking legislatures to overturn election results even after all legal avenues were exhausted.
It doesn't make pj right to not answer his questions. It doesn't make me right for not answering my question. But it seems so odd for someone so thoughtful as yourself.
Thanks joj,
I figured that you wouldn't want to miss a golden opportunity to try to sow discord, which unfortunately we have to accept with you(nobody is perfect) along with your solid liberal views(that add great value).
"but never answered my question of how you would describe Trump asking legislatures to overturn election results even after all legal avenues were exhausted."
No I didn't directly answer that one and never said or pretended that I did DIRECTLY in that thread but did in others the past many weeks. So if that still isn't clear. I think this is wrong of him.
I thought I was being pretty clear communicating in the thread that you are complaining about and the fact that you continue to look for reason to disagree here vs agreeing tells me you didn't want to listen and there was no failure in communication...........you just don't want to hear the message.
Since YOU brought it up again, here it is. Read the last post over again. You never responded to me.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/62603/
With regards to pj, as promised I WILL answer all of his questions as promised and using the method that I promised. Question is, will you and he accept the answers?
One of the ironic things about you joj is that I appreciate you BECAUSE you disagree with everything here. I tell you that often. And you are conditioned to do it so much that you don't even want to agree................about you disagreeing with everything here.
This is the latest example of it that I was pointing out on the thread that you are trying to disagree about......proving my point exactly from that thread:
mm: "I think this is wrong of him."
I would not disagree with that sentence. :)
But I think the words "illegal" or "unlawful" are more accurate.
"But I think the words "illegal" or "unlawful" are more accurate."
I would not disagree with that, but think the word WRONG is better (-:
I'm totally kidding joj!
And happy to have you giving us your views here.
I'll be tied up until at least late tonight with some Christmas celebrating with the grandkids but will get the specific answers for you when I have a chance.
Because of COVID, they haven't been over in 9 months outside of brief outdoor visits.
My daughter is an occupational therapist in geriatrics in charge of a large skilled nursing home chain in Indiana and has seen what COVID does to old people and is insisting on protecting us.
She just got her first COVID shot yesterday.
I've not been ignoring the request, pj. I realized that I was going to be cut and pasting a ton of stuff from my previous posts, that I will use to answer most of these questions, not necessarily in the order that you asked them but I will do one at a time and number them.
This is one of the more recent question posts that I was referring to:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/56930/#56939
pj says: mm: you keep quoting the same stuff, but as I won't convince you, you won't convince me.
If your position is correct, why did the NIH stop its clinical trials? Why did the FDA revoke it's authorization for use? Why does Fauci continue to say it's "not effective". Because they want to make Trump look bad?
If it's effective, why are we still having over 1000 deaths a day?
And, I can't help but wonder if your position would still be the same, if Trump had come out against using it and his detractors were all for it.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Most recent questions in this thread that I will finally answer. Sorry for the delay:
pj says: mm: So how come with so many new cases, hospitalizations and deaths, why isn't being widely used? Why no big public outcry that be used?
Why do you ignore the numerous studies including those in the link I provided that showed it's inefficacy and lead to the FDA to rescind its emergency use and not even think it warranted further trials ?
If it works why not a big push by some entity now for more trials to prove it?
Why didn't they give it to Trump?
If it is effective and is being used successfully, why are so many still dying?
All because the media that's anti-Trump has suppressed reports of its success? That seems a little hard to believe.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
pj,
I looked at all the studies that you sent and appreciate those very much....... and every single one that I could get my eyes on, which I believe is most of them available online. Before we go on, you have not answered the question about how you think hydroxychloroquine works. This is an extraordinarily critical element that must be known, when you have studies of the same thing that are coming to completely opposite conclusions..............and you have to try to figure out which one is closer to the authentic science. If you don't know the science yourself, then you are using something else to pick and choose your studies. I spent a long time studying the science of hydroxychloroquine before contemplating forming an opinion. Without doing that, any opinion is NOT an informed opinion.
Here is one of the posts in the links that I asked you to look at above to get your answers, explaining it(there were a couple of others but this one was my favorite):
By metmike - July 6, 2020, 2:02 p.m.
12-23: This is the link to get the post below:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/55059/#55216
You keep repeating this over and over and over as if it means that this drug can't work because you don't understand how the drug works.
I had already acknowledged my concern with this study when finding out that some patients were also taking steroids.
Personally, I have not decided how much HCQ works but being familiar with the biological mechanism...........which is why its used extensively for autoimmune diseases and inflammation, I am 100% certain that it would help to fight inflammation in SOME patients.
This may be 1 reason why steroids are working too(the other is that steroids suppress /regulate your immune system.
You keep hanging your hat on anything and everything that shows this drug can't work.......including discrediting ALL results of the latest study, as if the HCQ couldn't have been responsible for any of those big life savings benefits.
Whether you will admit it or not, if inflammation is part of this disease(in the lungs) as reports suggest then HCQ will help SOME patients because its proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that HCQ reduces inflammation.
You keep dwelling on everything that discredits this drug....................I'm looking at everything with an open mind and a pretty good understanding of how it actually works.
Show me where I am wrong about the inflammation?
This is why I'm right:
https://arthritis-research.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13075-019-2040-6
SAA stimulation induced significant production of IL-1β in human neutrophils. SAA stimulation also induced NF-κB activation, pro-IL-1β mRNA expression, and NLRP3 protein expression in human neutrophils. HCQ pretreatment significantly inhibited the SAA-induced IL-1β production in human neutrophils, but did not affect the SAA-induced NF-κB activation, pro-IL-1β mRNA expression, and NLRP3 protein expression. Furthermore, SAA stimulation induced cleaved caspase-1 (p20) secretion from human neutrophils, and this release was suppressed by HCQ pretreatment.
Treatment with HCQ was associated with impaired production of IL-1β in SAA-stimulated human neutrophils without affecting the priming process of the NLRP3 inflammasome such as pro-IL-1β or NLRP3 induction. These findings suggest that HCQ affects the NLRP3 activation process, resulting in the impaired IL-1β production in human neutrophils, as representative innate immune cells.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
12-23: This is the 2nd link to get the post below:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/55059/#55061
Re: Re: Trump-touted COVID-19 drug hydroxychloroquine works
By metmike - July 3, 2020, 8:18 p.m.
I'm not surprised at all by this based on what I learned about how hydroxychloroquine works then finding out that steroids(like I've been taking for 26 years) and blood thinners worked very effectively to treat COVID a couple of weeks ago.
I'm not a doctor but I understand the biological mechanism of how steroids work to reduce inflammation and since this is what is thought to help COVID patients,, it would only make sense that another drug, hydroxychloroquine(that works a bit differently to reduce inflammation) would also have the same affect.
Common Steroid is Treatment for Severe COVID-19?
Started by metmike - June 18, 2020, 12:30 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/54087/
You might remember that this drug has been in widespread use for a very long time to treat lupus and osteoarthritis because it reduces inflammation. It's also used to treat malaria because it kills the parasite by a different mechanism. I stated on the forum several times that I would love to use hydrox if I got COVID because the worst thing that could happen is that it would at least help with my inflammation/autoimmune issues.
This is a peer reviewed study and is pretty compelling and again, makes medical sense based on what we found out in the last month about steroids also working by reducing inflammation. It's sort of sad that we can't trust news sources and even medical studies, like the one earlier this year that claimed hydroxychlogoquine was actually killing patients(hundreds of millions of people have taken it for malaria for decades with no major side effects........ but that one made headline news for weeks). Turns out that study was discredited.
This one will not be!
Previous threads on this topic:
Scientists/academics-On the “science” of COVID
15 responses |
Started by metmike - May 31, 2020, 2:40 p.m.
OK, let's answer some of your questions again:
1. Why do you ignore the numerous studies including those in the link I provided that showed it's inefficacy and lead to the FDA to rescind its emergency use and not even think it warranted further trials ?
Answer: I have never ignored any studies. I looked at every study I could get my eyes on, including the one that you showed. There were tons of studies. I commented/proved the biggest study that supposedly showed HQ does not work and actually was dangerous/killing people as being junk science.
Find this post here:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/55059/#55170
Then, they go on again as they have, to make the assertion of dangerous cardiac side effects for a drug that has been used by many tens of millions of people safely for decades.
The main study which warned us about the cardiac side effects was discredited and the medical community condemned it and the methods resoundingly. Maybe you missed that one since you get your news from CNN.
The hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) efficacy issue has generated a lot of debate globally as well. The Lancet study is now under severe criticism from more than 180 scientists worldwide for not releasing the data for an independent analysis outside.
The scientific community is furious seeing a poorly written and poorly executed study published in The Lancet that has not only received huge underserved publicity but also created a massive negative impact on the other judiciously planned clinical trials being conducted around the world. More than 100 scientists and clinicians have sent an open letter to The Lancet's editor, Richard Horton, and the paper's authors asking them many uncomfortable questions, but have failed to receive convincing answers from the authors.
The letter alleges that
Meanwhile, Professor Harvey Risch, MD, Epidemiologist from Yale University has recommended an early therapy with Hydroxychloroquine & Azithromycin in the early therapy for COVID-19. His study Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk Covid-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to the Pandemic Crisis has been published by Oxford University Press, on behalf of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
12-22: With regards to the actions of the politically biased and corrupt FDA, they have very low credibility for me. I'll use authentic science which includes learning about and understanding the science then try to use educated judgments on whats authentic and what not vs relying on political entities like the FDA to feed their, sometime junk science based on profits agenda.
Find the posts at this link:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/55059/#55062
Re: Re: Re: Trump-touted COVID-19 drug hydroxychloroquine works
By metmike - July 3, 2020, 8:22 p.m.
metmike: On the FDA here. I have shown how blatantly corrupt this entity is for years.(they thrive on bribes). They are hopelessly incompetent as shown here. Earlier this year, they fast tracked this drug and recommended it because they claimed it showed enough benefits with early results. Then, they did an about face and revoked emergency use because of bogus studies and political pressure(which is what drives them much of the time).
Now, what are they to do with this compelling, peer reviewed evidence of the sort that should drive all their decisions?
It's completely clear that they have to reverse again, for the 3rd time in 3 months in order to save lives............and this time its for the right reason(and supports their decision, 2 decisions ago). But this has been an open display of the sort of thing that defines the FDA. See links to follow.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
By Jacqueline Howard, Arman Azad and Maggie Fox, CNN
Updated 5:44 PM ET, Mon June 15, 2020
(CNN)The Food and Drug Administrationhas revoked its emergency use authorization for the drugs hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine for the treatment of Covid-19.
Hydroxychloroquine was frequently touted by President Donald Trump, and he has claimed to have used it himself.
After reviewing the current research available on the drugs, the FDA determined that the drugs do not meet "the statutory criteria" for emergency use authorization as they are unlikely to be effective in treating Covid-19 based on the latest scientific evidence, the agency noted on its website on Monday.
"FDA has concluded that, based on this new information and other information discussed in the attached memorandum, it is no longer reasonable to believe that oral formulations of HCQ and CQ may be effective in treating COVID-19, nor is it reasonable to believe that the known and potential benefits of these products outweigh their known and potential risks," FDA chief scientist Denise Hinton wrote in a letter to Gary Disbrow of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) on Monday. Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine have been tied to serious cardiac eventsas well as other side effects among Covid-19 patients.
"Accordingly, FDA revokes the EUA for emergency use of HCQ and CQ to treat COVID-19," Hinton wrote in the letter, using abbreviations for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine. "As of the date of this letter, the oral formulations of HCQ and CQ are no longer authorized by FDA to treat COVID-19."
metmike: The FDA consists of a bunch of corrupt, incompetent people that often use politics and bribery to determine policies.
Re: Re: Trump-touted COVID-19 drug hydroxychloroquine works
By metmike - July 3, 2020, 8:24 p.m.
Among the investigation's key findings:
FInd the post below at:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/53061/#53107
Re: Re: Scientists/academics-On the “science” of COVID
By metmike - June 1, 2020, 1:06 a.m.
Thanks pj,
Your comments are always some of my favorites because they question me.
The point is not above PROVEN science, like gravity or the earth revolving around the sun or the freezing point of water under certain conditions.
All those things can be proven irrefutably.
There is plenty of uncertainty in areas that are being sold to us as certainty, including hydroxychloroquine.
Scientists should use the scientific method and be OBJECTIVE, open minded and not let hate or support of a politician bias their views or distort the facts.
pj: Abandon science and what’s left? Trump promoting hydroxychloroquine as a preventive and cure, despite scientific evidence to the contrary. Suggesting trying the injection of disinfectant and internal use of bright light?
This is the position of the person that repeatedly claims to rely on facts?
Since you brought it up because your feelings for Trump influence your opinion on those topics, before I formed an opinion, I first did the research to get the scientific facts and THEN had an opinion.
Here, I'll share them with you again.........please tell me what is flawed about the science below? Any time my facts or science end up showing something that supports Trump, it's always "Blinded by the Clown Syndrome" for you.
So tell or show me where my facts or science are wrong below.
and how about the UV treatment of Corona?
Started by GunterK - April 26, 2020, 5 p.m.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/51223/
On the hydroxychloroquine, there are studies that show taking it BEFORE hand will reduce the severity but I am not BELIEVING those studies, I am just being open minded enough (using the scientific method) to appreciate the legit possibility that those studies MIGHT be right vs believing other limited studies and that show it doesn't help AFTER you have it. And I know with 100% certainty that the risk to taking it is extremely low (contrary to what the MSM has lied to us about) because tens of millions of people have taken it over the last few decades. I would actually seriously consider taking it for its proven anti inflammatory affects, which is why people with Lupus and Rheumatoid Arthritis take it (I have an autoimmune disease, Ankylosingspodylisis with symptoms similar to Lupus). It's taken by more people for Malaria though.
Science and Medicine are not what you think they are pj.
https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124
12-22: So far, all I've been doing is cutting and pasting old stuff and have not added anything new.
2. If it works why not a big push by some entity now for more trials to prove it?
12-22 How do you think that this thread got started pj? It was about one of those trials to use it.
Here, let me give you a few of them with other evidence from previous posts:
. https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/62920/
A peer-reviewed study measuring the effectiveness of a controversial drug cocktail that includes hydroxychloroquine concluded that the treatment lowered hospitalizations and mortality rates of coronavirus patients.
The study, set to be published in the International Journal of Antimicrobial Agents in December, determined that “Low-dose hydroxychloroquine combined with zinc and azithromycin was an effective therapeutic approach against COVID-19.”
A total of 141 patients diagnosed with the coronavirus were treated with the three-drug cocktail over a period of five days and compared to a control group of 377 people who tested positive for the virus but were not given the treatment.
The study found that “the odds of hospitalisation of treated patients was 84% less than in the untreated patients,” and only one patient died from the group being treated with the drugs compared to 13 deaths in the untreated group. Hydroxychloroquine became a controversial issue during the height of the coronavirus pandemic when President Trump championed the drug as an effective coronavirus treatment, which immediately drew criticism from the media and several health experts.
Twitter censored a video over the summer showing doctors touting the effectiveness of the drug.
Additionally, a July study conducted by the Henry Ford Health System in Michigan concluded that patients taking hydroxychloroquine were more likely to survive the coronavirus.
From this link:
The topic of this drug has turned very political..............which is why I did my own research on how and why it works to have a similar understanding that medical doctors have............that are prescribing it.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Here's a couple of other studies:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/62920/#62998
So I am just reporting to you the facts pj. I already showed you how some of those previous studies that you believe were bogus. Look at the previous discussions, its all there very clearly stated.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2020/10/26/remdesivir-for-covid-19-study-accidentally-proved-effectiveness-of-hydroxychloroquine/
A new study of over 2000 hospitalized patients reveals that Hydroxychloroquine works very well in treatment of COVID. The reason I’m so excited about this one is because unlike the poor studies that I’ve written about already, this study controlled the dosages, use the correct levels of HCQ and Azythromycin per other studies, and matched patients to each other by their own health situations. This matching of health condition is the proper method to control the confounding factors in a situation where testing cannot be double-blind. The health of the patient is what the frustratingly fake studies didn’t correct for, but certain political pressures made them popular.
This is absolutely the most conclusive research produced to date by anyone, due mostly to the quality of the approach. No one has published this quality level of work on HCQ on humans prior to this.
pj,
What amazes me most is that you are concluding from all of this pretty dang convincing evidence, that its just my cognitive bias and has something to do with President Trump(for me).
If me or my wife get COVID, I will want HQ, especially for me as it would probably also help with my autoimmune disorder that I've been taking prednisone for the past 26 years...........it could kill 2 birds with one stone!
Besides effectively treating lupus and RA, HQ has been shown to treat other autoimmune issues based on its ability to modulate the immune and inflammation response.
This is just science/medicine.
http://www.gidoctor.net/hydro-crohns-ulcerative.php
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
12-22 Here is more:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/55059/#55060
Re: Trump-touted COVID-19 drug hydroxychloroquine works
By metmike - July 3, 2020, 8:11 p.m.
Treatment with Hydroxychloroquine Cut Death Rate Significantly in COVID-19 Patients, Henry Ford Health System Study Shows
https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study
DETROIT – Treatment with hydroxychloroquine cut the death rate significantly in sick patients hospitalized with COVID-19 – and without heart-related side-effects, according to a new study published by Henry Ford Health System.
In a large-scale retrospective analysis of 2,541 patients hospitalized between March 10 and May 2, 2020 across the system’s six hospitals, the study found 13% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine alone died compared to 26.4% not treated with hydroxychloroquine. None of the patients had documented serious heart abnormalities; however, patients were monitored for a heart condition routinely pointed to as a reason to avoid the drug as a treatment for COVID-19.
The study was published today in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases, the peer-reviewed, open-access online publication of the International Society of Infectious Diseases (ISID.org).
Patients treated with hydroxychloroquine at Henry Ford met specific protocol criteria as outlined by the hospital system’s Division of Infectious Diseases. The vast majority received the drug soon after admission; 82% within 24 hours and 91% within 48 hours of admission. All patients in the study were 18 or over with a median age of 64 years; 51% were men and 56% African American.
“The findings have been highly analyzed and peer-reviewed,” said Dr. Marcus Zervos, division head of Infectious Disease for Henry Ford Health System, who co-authored the study with Henry Ford epidemiologist Dr. Samia Arshad. “We attribute our findings that differ from other studies to early treatment, and part of a combination of interventions that were done in supportive care of patients, including careful cardiac monitoring. Our dosing also differed from other studies not showing a benefit of the drug. And other studies are either not peer reviewed, have limited numbers of patients, different patient populations or other differences from our patients.”
Zervos said the potential for a surge in the fall or sooner, and infections continuing worldwide, show an urgency to identifying inexpensive and effective therapies and preventions.
“We’re glad to add to the scientific knowledge base on the role and how best to use therapies as we work around the world to provide insight,” he said. “Considered in the context of current studies on the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19, our results suggest that the drug may have an important role to play in reducing COVID-19 mortality.”
“Our analysis shows that using hydroxychloroquine helped saves lives,” said neurosurgeon Dr. Steven Kalkanis, CEO, Henry Ford Medical Group and Senior Vice President and Chief Academic Officer of Henry Ford Health System. “As doctors and scientists, we look to the data for insight. And the data here is clear that there was benefit to using the drug as a treatment for sick, hospitalized patients.”
+++++++++++++++++++++++++
12-22: And more:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/55059/#55060
Re: Re: Re: Re: Trump-touted COVID-19 drug hydroxychloroquine works
By metmike - July 7, 2020, 11:09 p.m.
Hydroxychloroquine-based COVID-19 Treatment, A Systematic Review of Clinical Evidence and Expert Opinion from Physicians’ Surveys
"85% of the globally surveyed physicians recognized HCQ as at least partially effective in treating COVID-19, according to Sermo W3. More than half of the surveyed US physicians would take the drug or give it to family members early or even before onset of symptoms, according to JC."
Aside from the rarely used plasma, HCQ / HCQ+AZ based treatments are preferred by physicians by wide margin over other drugs. HCQ / HCQ+AZ based treatments are the most used, most recommended, and most highly rated by physicians treating COVID-19 at an early stage."
metmike: This was my comment:
I have an auto immune disorder, related to ankylosing spondylitis and lupus and have been taking all sorts of meds for 26 years, including a moderate dose of steroids daily that entire time.
It was interesting to find out in June that patients receiving steroids fared much better than those who did not receive steroids.
This is thought to be from the reduction in inflammation(in the lungs) and also the suppressing/modulating of the immune system which steroids cause. In COVID patients the immune system can go berserk, setting off a cytokine storm.
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/fullarticle/2767939
There are several things that we know about HCQ with certainty. One of them is that its been given to hundreds of millions of people world wide, mostly for malaria with very few side effects. So it’s proven to be safe if used properly.
Another thing is that it reduces inflammation. This is why its also given to patients with lupus and other forms of arthritis, with significant benefits and improvements in health/inflammation.
https://arthritis-research.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13075-019-2040-6
So in using it with COVID patients, we already know that its safe and that it WILL reduce inflammation in at least some patients……….that’s what the drug does.
With that being the case, one assumes that if inflammation in the lungs from COVID is adversely affecting patients and outcomes, then HCQ, with its anti inflammatory PROVEN benefits should help at least some patients by reducing inflammation.
You can find results in recent studies that are all over the place about this drug. Which ones to believe and which ones not to believe? Some completely contradict each other.
However, medical doctors should/do understand how HCQ works and the clear anti inflammatory properties and the long proven safety. This is why they are prescribing it to so many patients.
Their patients would/will be dead or recovered if they wait around for the wishy washy, incompetent, corrupt and political FDA to decide on a final position with regards to HCQ.
3. "And, I can't help but wonder if your position would still be the same, if Trump had come out against using it and his detractors were all for it."
12-22: pj, You have been mischaracterizing me this way since this issue began, so that it makes it easier for you to attack my position and defend yours, instead of dealing with the facts and authentic science. I have shown beyond everybody's shadow of a doubt that I use the scientific method here and am not biased on issues because of an affiliation with Trump...........especially not in the field of science.
No need for me to post half a dozen of your accusations of me having BBTC (Blinded By The Clown) syndrome and me showing/proving to you that Trump gets exactly ZERO weighting for anything related to science/medicine with me again.
How about, take a good look at the last few pages and tell me how Donald Trump played any role in anything that I posted?
You have been totally imagining this one and no matter much the compelling evidence shows exactly the opposite of what you accuse me of(having a bias on HQ because Trump recommended it) you will not discard that belief:
So let me ask you once again, in this thread or any other one on HQ, where is there evidence that I'm using anything that Trump said?
Where is there evidence that I don't understand how this drug works and have not looked at all the studies and for the first few months, was not totally objective, with no opinion until more science came in?
12-22: Whoops, it looks like that was the last question from your previous set of questions on this.
This is the right one:
3. "Why didn't they give it to Trump?"
pj, You are asking a question that I can't have the answer to, suggesting that because they didn't give it to President Trump it must not work. Again, you are wrapped up in what Trump says and does and let that define your beliefs on this and I give what Trump has said and done exactly ZERO credibility. He was also taking it earlier in the year as a preventative and came out about that. That too, had a ZERO impact on anything related to the science of this drug. I think that I've convincingly made a case for the science here. It's NOT A CURE. It helps some people with absolute certainty based on the biological mechanism and observations. If you don't want to see the science because of your feelings about Trump, you are still my friend and I feel I've done everything possible to help you.
Not to win an argument and prove that I'm right and you are wrong. To show you the science. The data and facts and science and the data and facts and science. You can accept them or reject them. You can believe some sources without actually knowing anything about the drug for whatever reason you want to use but it ain't because of science.............its because you won't listen to the science which I've been trying to beat you over the head with.
4. If it is effective and is being used successfully, why are so many still dying?
12-22: Similar answer to earlier about them still doing alot of studies on this, some showing solid results. As mentioned, it's not a cure for everybody. Actually, it's extremely likely that more people would be dying from it:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/55059/#55060
Re: Re: Re: Re: Trump-touted COVID-19 drug hydroxychloroquine works
By metmike - July 7, 2020, 11:09 p.m.
Hydroxychloroquine-based COVID-19 Treatment, A Systematic Review of Clinical Evidence and Expert Opinion from Physicians’ Surveys
"85% of the globally surveyed physicians recognized HCQ as at least partially effective in treating COVID-19, according to Sermo W3. More than half of the surveyed US physicians would take the drug or give it to family members early or even before onset of symptoms, according to JC."
Aside from the rarely used plasma, HCQ / HCQ+AZ based treatments are preferred by physicians by wide margin over other drugs. HCQ / HCQ+AZ based treatments are the most used, most recommended, and most highly rated by physicians treating COVID-19 at an early stage."
5. "All because the media that's anti-Trump has suppressed reports of its success? That seems a little hard to believe."
12-22: Yeah for you its hard to believe because you believe them. I just showed you the science, studies and what many thousands of REAL medical doctors practicing medicine in the REAL world are actually doing....... that the media did not show you. You can continue to believe the media. They apparently have captured your brain when you make statements like this below. But these are my favorite statements here by far and why I love it when people like you question me.
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/62920/#62990
Re: Re: Re: 84% fewer hospitalizations for patients treated with hydroxychloroquine
By pj - Dec. 19, 2020, 12:39 a.m.
pj says: mm: For someone who claims to be a scientist and rely on facts, it still surprises me that you still seem so willing to rely on anecdotal evidence and ignore the results of the numerous studies that found no benefit (but rather possible negative cardiac side effects) when it comes to HCQ .
I know you’re very aware of confirmation bias, you’ve warned about it many times on mf. But it sure seems you may well have it, when it comes to HCQ.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So when you come here with that position, I can either show facts/data/science and answer all of your questions thoroughly to the best of my ability(again, because I like you) going back to retrieve the stuff that didn't compute with you the first several times to assist you and/or............try to learn something new.
I often do learn new things from your skepticism pj.
PJ said "If it works why not a big push by some entity now for more trials to prove it? "
My opinion: There is no money to be made from hydroxychloroquine so big tech doesn't fund the research.
JMHO
Thanks cutworm!
Great point that I forgot to mention..................looks like at least somebody is actually reading my stuff (-:
You are exactly right. HQ has been a cheap, safe drug that's been around for many decades used literally by many millions of people around the world to treat malaria(it prevents malarial parasites from metabolizing hemoglobin in our blood, so they starve)
And safely to treat various forms of arthritis and autoimmune disorders as it helps modulate the over active immune response and reduce damaging inflammation.
This is why the thousands of doctors who have been prescribing it are familiar enough with the biological mechanism of how it works and what it does, along with the safety, to have such confidence in widely prescribing it for COVID.
And they have been prescribing it much more than has been reported by the MSM.
Thousands of medical doctors trying to help patients recover from COVID could care less what President Trumps view is on hydroxychloroquine.
And though they pay attention to studies and read medical literature, they also understand and PRACTICE medicine based on what works and because they are educated in this field(THEY are the authorities).
Still many doctors, are think inside the box, use only what is authorized and advised type practitioners.
Fortunately, especially in this case, a good deal of others are think outside the box, applying critical thinking and medicinal knowledge for off label uses type practitioners......... that are often extremely useful for treating their patients.
https://www.drugs.com/price-guide/hydroxychloroquine
The cost for hydroxychloroquine oral tablet 200 mg is around $37 for a supply of 100 tablets, depending on the pharmacy you visit. Prices are for cash paying customers only and are not valid with insurance plans.
At 37c/pill they won't be making much money!
Which brings up a great related point on price gouging of our drugs.
If you use meds, you should go online and get the GoodRx coupon price and compare it to the price(s) you pay now.
Most people, including metmike save massive amounts of dough.
These prices, in many cases are even lower than drugs covered under your insurance plan.
Here is an example with hydroxychloroquine:
https://www.goodrx.com/plaquenil
Save money on prescriptions
Started by metmike - Aug. 15, 2020, 12:22 a.m.
Ya know what really hilarious about the drug cost debate?
We have a lot of people who actually believe lobbyists and unelected bureaucrats will get together and somehow negotiate a better deal for us. Maybe they think senator Warren is going to sit down at the negotiating table with the CEO of Pfizer? Note: I suspect she has, but it had nothing to do with lowering drug prices.
The childlike naivete is kinda charming but really shouldn't be used in assorted decisions.
I just realized that I missed something that pj may have wanted.
He posted this quote from this link last week from this study:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/62920/#62990
"On the balance of probability, unless higher doses are tested in ongoing trials, there appears little cause for optimism in repurposing either CQ or HCQ, with or without AZM, to fight COVID‐19 pandemic. The resulting discontinuation of HCQ from major large studies effectively marks the end of repurposing CQ or HCQ for combating COVID‐19" https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcpt.13267
metmike: So let's discuss that study then.
pj likes their conclusion, so he cut/pasted it. I can't tell you how many scientific studies on all sorts of things that made conclusions(glucosamine was a huge one) of something that contradicts what they actually found(many hundreds).........when you actually look at the results of their study. This is when study bias in those doing it is most obvious.
Here is what I mean:
First of all, many to most of my posts that refer to HQ as beneficial refer to the absolutely proven affect on fighting inflammation. This is indisputable.
This study, only looked at other studies about HQ with respect to its ability to reduce viral load/infection, not inflammation or other responses. I copied the 13 studies they looked at below, with my comments below that.
Study Indication Type Drug Findings
| Chen et al | Infection | Randomized, parallel groups | HCQ | Use of HCQ was associated with shorter time to clinical recovery and improvement in pneumonia | 28 |
| Gautret et al | Infection | Non‐randomized, open label | HCQ + AZM | Significant reduction/elimination of viral load in association with HCQ treatment, an effect that that was augmented by AZM | 29 |
| RECOVERY | Infection | Prospective, randomized, open label, controlled | HCQ | No significant difference between HCQ and control groups in 28‐d mortality and no evidence of beneficial effects on hospital stay duration or other outcomes | 35 |
| Lee et al | Prophylaxis | Observational | HCQ | Post‐exposure prophylaxis with HCQ was effective | 37 |
| Molina et al | Infection | Prospective, uncontrolled | HCQ + AZM | No evidence of a strong antiviral activity or clinical benefit | 38 |
| Chen et al | Infection | Prospective, randomized | HCQ | No evidence of a strong antiviral activity or clinical benefit | 39 |
| Gautret et al | Infection | Pilot observational | HCQ + AZM | Rapid fall of nasopharyngeal viral load | 40 |
| Million et al | Infection | Retrospective analysis | HCQ + AZM | Virologic cure, reduced number of transfers to intensive care unit and lower mortality rate | 41 |
| Mahévas et al | Infection | Comparative observational | HCQ | No survival benefit without transfer to the intensive care unit | 42 |
| Tang et al | Infection | Randomized, controlled, open label | HCQ | No difference between HCQ and control groups in negative conversion by 28 d | 43 |
| Geleris et al | Infection | Observational | HCQ | No evidence of benefit in terms of the need for intubation or death | 44 |
| Boulware et al | Prophylaxis | Randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled | HCQ | HCQ did not prevent confirmed infection or an illness compatible with COVID‐19 | 45 |
| Mitja et al | Infection | Open label, randomized controlled | HCQ | No significant differences in the mean reduction of viral load, reduction in risk of hospitalization or time to complete resolution of symptoms |
Things to note:
8 out of the 13 studies found no significant benefits from HQ. However, 5 out of the 13 found the complete opposite. "significant benefits" a "rapid fall of viral load" "a Virologic cure"
When faced with complete opposite findings for the same drug, how the heck is one to know which ones to believe???
1. As I mentioned previously, one of the best ways is to learn how the drug actually works. Then, when interpreting contrasting studies, it will help you to understand which ones make more sense.
2. Determine if the studies are using solid science or not.
3. Access thoughts and actual usage patterns from an authority(s) that you can trust. Medical doctors in this case, thousands of which around the world that have been treating patients with HQ and could care less about Donald Trump, especially those that are not from the US.
4. Look at the verbiage of the study and see if the discussion/conclusion matches up with the findings.
This study fails miserably in 2 respects.
In order to conclude "there is little cause for optimism for reporposing HCQ" they have to ignore 5 of the studies in their study. There are actually some other good scientifically sound studies they did not include. This, at the very least should be a clue to some sort of bias. Why would scientists completely ignore one side, that is even making a case to be heard in their own data?
Reading their study tells us why and where they are coming from:
"on 21 March 2020, President Trump claimed the drug combination to have ‘… a real chance of being one of the biggest game‐changers in the history of medicine’."
They go into all sorts of politics in describing several different dynamics. It's clear they are looking at politics and letting this influence them.
They should only look at the scientific data from the studies. It seems obvious from their very misleading conclusion(being generous .....as its really false and represents biased, junk science......more like politics not authentic science) .
Objective scientists would have at least included verbiage that represented studies that did show affectiveness. Instead of using the scientific method(trying to prove themselves wrong and when they can't, it means that they are right) they applied the ANTI scientific method................cherry picked the studies that they liked and discarded the ones that prove they were wrong.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
I started extremely skeptical of HCQ in the Spring but objective. Actually, for several weeks, I was pretty sure it didn't work AFTER Trump advised it, interestingly. There was nothing but negative news and results that seemed overwhelmingly against it. However, the legit science/medicine continued its steady march forward under the radar screen........... intentionally censored by the MSM, which continually bombarded us with junk science about HCQ.
That is not just an opinion, I lived it and you can scroll up for all the evidence. Again, HCQ is not a cure but there is profound evidence that it helps many patients in 2 different areas.
There is another lesson to be learned about scientific studies too. So many of us that are not experts in that field will go down to the discussion/conclusion of the study/paper. You can get 98% of the meaning of the results by just reading what the scientists want you to know in this part of the study.
They know this too. The problem is that many studies are biased and in those that are, you are just reading what THEY WANT YOU TO THINK.
https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124