Positive Results From Hydroxychloroquine Study

  • Thread starter Thread starter josie_L
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Boatswain2PA said:
The role of the press has been to denigrate President Trump since he won the Republican nomination.
Click to expand...
Which press? some might argue the role of the mainstream [sic leftwing] is to check the honesty of President Trump, and others might argue the role of the rightwing press is to look the other way.

Hopefully its somewhere in the middle…but I don’t we’ll see that in the next 118 days…Tick Tock!
 
Probably not (and hopefully by the grace of God)…but the live’s of the vulnerable are, and not just the political life of a candidate who is a denier. 118 days will tell what America thinks…Tick Tock!
 
Last edited:
As I said, the conclusions are such that the mortality rate is reduced but PROSPECTIVE TRIALS ARE NEEDED TO EXAMINE THIS IMPACT.
josie_L said:

Conclusions and Relevance​

In this multi-hospital assessment, when controlling for COVID-19 risk factors, treatment with hydroxychloroquine alone and in combination with azithromycin was associated with REDUCTION in COVID-19 associated mortality. Prospective trials are needed to examine this impact.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Old enough to vote…that’s all that really counts right now…118 days…Tick Tock!
 
josie_L said:
Then it’s a question of maturity.
Click to expand...
Yes it is a question of maturity, and not a question of chronology, which makes your question “How old are you”, irrelevant. Wisdom does not always come with age…there are plenty of unwise (and immature, for that matter) older people.
 
Last edited:
Mine was more a statement of fact as in you’re being immature.
 
Last edited:
josie_L said:
Mine was a statement of fact as in you’re being immature.
Click to expand...
Depends on how you look at it, I guess…“Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts”, I think is an applicable quote made by a wise man.
 
dscath . . .
There is no credible medical or scientific evidence . . .
Click to expand...
There is lots of “credible evidence”.

What there is NOT yet is a double-blinded prospective study that is reproducible. Yet.

Those are in the works.
 
Cathoholic said:
What there is NOT yet is a double-blinded prospective study that is reproducible. Yet.
Click to expand...
I agree with your assessment, making this story truly is much to do about nothing…thanks for the clarification.
 
No. It is not much ado about nothing.

It is about off-label use that is life-saving when used correctly or not.

There are many drugs used via off label use for benefit.

Studies will never be done as there is no financial incentive. But since these off label uses are not politicized, virtually nobody is concerned.

With the Wuhan Corona Virus it is different.
The concern here is a broad-based public health issue driving these many studies.

Studies that passed human studies committees for approval by the way.

You can’t do a randomized, prospective, double-blind study on humans with drugs, unless you get approval first. Approval from a human studies committee.

You cannot get approval from a human studies committee without preliminary evidence.

Preliminary evidence includes physiologic mechanisms purported and clinical data if available.
(Sometimes incidental clinical data. i.e. in this case if lupus HCQ-treated patients seemed to do much better, this data theoretically might be taken into consideration).
 
The financial incentive had to do with new drug exploration of uses, rather than old drug usage.

Please go back and re-read the thread.
 
Please RE-read the thread. HCQ testing IS happening.

And I have already talked about it right here.
 
Thbolt judging the scientific rigor of studies in progress . . . .
but they seem to lack the necessary scientific rigor.
Click to expand...
Thbolt. Please explain to me the three purposed physiologic mechanisms of the theoretical advantage of HCQ in the presence of Corona Virus?

Then we can assess how that applies to the studies in progress.
 
Most complete overview of HCQ studies here:

c19hcq.com

HCQ for COVID-19: real-time analysis of all 591 studies

HCQ for COVID-19: real-time analysis of all 591 studies
c19hcq.com c19hcq.com

Negative studies are included with the positive ones. The overall point made is that early usage is significantly better than late usage. Late usage comes with mixed results including the negative studies that the naysayers here have been so quick to jump on. Every negative study featured late usage. Everyone knows by now that cherry picking late usage is the way to say this doesn’t work. So future studies and trials that feature late usage are simply not going to be credible going forward.

If someone has a better overview of all HCQ studies, let’s have it. If someone thinks this link is underplaying the negative results, let’s have that too. If someone thinks this link left out negative results, send it to them, they provide a form at the bottom of the page.

I find it interesting that although lupus and rheumatoid arthritis are both autoimmune diseases, neither are considered risk factors for Covid-19 despite the listing of autoimmune diseases in general. The CDC has the data. No way they don’t have it. But we’re not going to hear about it. Because it doesn’t say what they want it to say.

This is how the path is being cleared for Remdesivir and soon, vaccines. Push the cheap options off the stage.
 
Last edited:
Cathoholic said:
Thbolt. Please explain to me the three purposed physiologic mechanisms of the theoretical advantage of HCQ in the presence of Corona Virus?
Then we can assess how that applies to the studies in progress.
Click to expand...
Thbolt’s reply . . .
Oh, I think I remember your response to me yesterday as you pose this question…
Click to expand...
Well that is amazing. Especially since I did not discuss the pathophysiology of corona virus infections yesterday.

But that’s great you recall it.

Now please expound it.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Lost me after “Wuhan Corona Virus” which, in my opinion, is to little more than an attempt to advance xenophobia and deny science…the virus is “Covid 19”, not “Wuhan Corona VIrus” or even worse “Kung-flu”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top