Coronavirus

[linux-works]

something for people to watch out for, I guess.

I just 'laughed it off' a few days after it mostly passed, but when I heard my friend at work also reporting the same exact thing, that raised a red flag.

"red flag" - I could make a joke about china virus, but that meme is already long in the tooth.

 

[bkp_duke]

thanks Papafox

that’s becoming more and more apparent. the intellectually dishonest tactics of “people say,” ad hominems, and gross mischaracterization of my statements in lieu of considering the data I share and sharing data in responses have been more than a small set of clues.

all that said, I don’t say any of this with animosity. just my personal view of life, being human is not easy for any of us, and our developmental susceptibility to grab at an illusory ‘ego certain safe haven’ is strong and can be intertwined with all kinds of things... like whether drug X is “allowed to be thought of as potentially helpful.” note, I wrote “intellectually dishonest” above. I think everybody here is being emotionally honest so to speak. They really, really, feel like they want HCQ in covid to be quackery because of very intense human tensions we all experience that have us all susceptible to that kind of illusory ego chase. I’ll probably be mocked for writing all this... that’s okay, privately, even those mocking may realize I’m trying to be empathetic and non-judgemental.

I’ll reply to a few more prior posts as people took the time to write them, and then I’ll move on to more helpful uses of my time as you’ve suggested.

I don't know where you get this "people say" BS, but I have always backed up my posts with hard data.

We are STILL waiting on that link for that study that you claim has 320,000 participants for HCQ and shows a benefit.

That's not ad hominem, that's just calling out your half-truths.

 

[Papafox]

Third and LAST time I will ask:
Link to the paper with 320,000 people studying HCQ and COVID-19.

Pretty please.


EDIT - you appear to be quoting this article, but (conveniently?) it is leaving out any links to the source material (i.e. the ACTUAL studies):
'The key to defeating COVID-19 already exists. We need to start using it,' Yale Epidemic Professor says | Tech News | Startups News

The author of that piece is a professor of epidemiology at Yale. Are you suggesting he just made up the studies? Pulled numbers out of the air, perhaps? That's really a ridiculous assertion, given the man's position and qualifications. It may take time to track down the study being referenced, but you can bet that it exists. The author is an M.D. He is a credible source. To suggest that the study doesn't exist unless someone can post it within 5 minutes is typical of the tactic used on this thread. I suggest a more even-handed response so that an honest discussion can actually take place here. I also know the next move when a link to this study is posted. You will dismiss it as quickly as you dismiss every other positive HCQ study.

 

[bkp_duke]

The author of that piece is a professor of epidemiology at Yale. Are you suggesting he just made up the studies? Pulled numbers out of the air, perhaps? That's really a ridiculous assertion, given the man's position and qualifications. It may take time to track down the study being referenced, but you can bet that it exists. The author is an M.D. He is a credible source. To suggest that the study doesn't exist unless someone can post it within 5 minutes is typical of the tactic used on this thread. I suggest a more even-handed response so that an honest discussion can actually take place here. I also know the next move when a link to this study is posted. You will dismiss it as quickly as you dismiss every other positive HCQ study.

I'm saying if he is going to quote them, he should link them.

That's how science works. Simple.


I've literally spent 45 minutes looking for it, and cannot find it. So I'm genuinely curious to find it.

 

[SteveG3]

will come back to answer the other posts prior to my last post, but quickly re the claims of 320,000 patients on HCQ and Azith. with only 1/10,000 cardiac fatalities.

yes, the Newsweek op-ed by the PHD/MD Yale epidemiologist with over 325 published papers was where I found the claim. yes, those qualifications add very considerable credibility to his statement in my view vs a random online claim, but, no it does not replace the legitimate interest in getting a direct link to the Oxford study to verify it is what Dr Risch wrote it is.

The author of that piece is a professor of epidemiology at Yale. Are you suggesting he just made up the studies? Pulled numbers out of the air, perhaps? That's really a ridiculous assertion, given the man's position and qualifications. It may take time to track down the study being referenced, but you can bet that it exists. The author is an M.D. He is a credible source. To suggest that the study doesn't exist unless someone can post it within 5 minutes is typical of the tactic used on this thread. I suggest a more even-handed response so that an honest discussion can actually take place here. I also know the next move when a link to this study is posted. You will dismiss it as quickly as you dismiss every other positive HCQ study.

this,

though,

I'm saying if he is going to quote
them, he should link them.

That's how science works. Simple.


I've literally spent 45 minutes looking for it, and cannot find it. So I'm genuinely curious to find it.

I’d also like to see the source and did a very superficial google search in the brief time since your request without results. it’s a clearly a legitimate request to my view, and I will email the Dr Risch/his office and let you know if I get a response.

 

[dfwatt]

@SteveG3 ,
Thank you for jumping into the hornet's nest to add pertinent information about HCQ. Unfortunately, for quite some time this thread has not been a place where such topics can be discussed in a reasonable fashion. You will be ridiculed for proposing that HCQ has any merit.The gatekeepers of this thread have it locked up too tightly.for non-conforming ideas to be tolerated. At some point you will be hit with idiot spray. Offering positive evidence in the HCQ discussion in the coronavirus thread is about as rewarding as being a policeman in Portland, Oregon, right now. Thanks for trying, though. Your energies and quick intellect will be better served in other threads.

I'd love for HCQ to be some kind of miracle drug in COVID19. It's just not - it doesn't produce that kind of data, and some data suggests more downsides than upsides. Can we be sure that some patients, within certain parameters, might not benefit? Of course not. But by and large, it does not appear to be a disease modifying therapy, from the data so far. Scepticism about it isn't political (au contraire as scepticism is the starting point of all real science as we must start all inquiry with a suspension of belief), although the drug has become enormously politicized/polarizing. That's a shame, but a clear consequence of Trumpism and its polarizing of everything.

 

[ZeApelido]

I encourge you to actually read the comments in the above study you linked. Most of those are actually from scientists and physicians, and they give you a good idea of the questions that the piers most likely have asked the original publishers of the article to expound upon, explain, and re-evaluate. You even get in many of them to see the actual physician/scientist making the comments.

Fake news.

Big pharma controls all doctors. Even writes their words for them.
GPT-3 is paid for by Big Pharma and the liberal elite to spout out nonsense found in all journal articles and comments.
They even got to the poster quoted here, look at the obvious spelling mistakes no human would make.
They all don't want HCQ to work because they can't make money off it and it would guarantee Trump re-election.
Anthony Fauci is jealous of Trump's stature and is suppressing Trump from saving our country.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Fake news.

Big pharma controls all doctors. Even writes their words for them.
GPT-3 is paid for by Big Pharma and the liberal elite to spout out nonsense found in all journal articles and comments.
They even got to the poster quoted here, look at the obvious spelling mistakes no human would make.
They all don't want HCQ to work because they can't make money off it and it would guarantee Trump re-election.
Anthony Fauci is jealous of Trump's stature and is suppressing Trump from saving our country.

Bravo. I honestly can't tell if this is satire or not.
Assuming it's not.
Why have all the other governments in the world concluded that HCQ is not a miracle cure?
How do you explain doctors embrace of dexamethasone as a treatment for COVID-19?
Trump is in charge of all the federal government agencies that could expose the truth about HCQ. Does this prove that he is an ineffective leader?

I've changed my mind. I think @ZeApelido is joking. It's almost perfectly balanced. haha

 

[Papafox]

I'd love for HCQ to be some kind of miracle drug in COVID19. It's just not - it doesn't produce that kind of data, and some data suggests more downsides than upsides. Can we be sure that some patients, within certain parameters, might not benefit? Of course not. But by and large, it does not appear to be a disease modifying therapy, from the data so far. Scepticism about it isn't political (au contraire as scepticism is the starting point of all real science as we must start all inquiry with a suspension of belief), although the drug has become enormously politicized/polarizing. That's a shame, but a clear consequence of Trumpism and its polarizing of everything.

The biggest frustration that many of us who see promise in HCQ used for COVID 19 treatment is the lack of differentiation between the proper use of the drug and uses that long ago were proven unsuitable. The "proper" use of the drug involves low dose (200mg) HCQ, azithromycin or other suitable antibiotic, and zinc, given as early as possible once symptoms appear. Doctors have used discretion in administering the cocktail, giving to patients over 60 years of age, those with preexisting conditions, and those showing shortage of breath. Most young people do not need to be treated.

The improper use of the drug is to give it to patients who are already hospitalized with more severe symptoms of the disease. Once the battle in the lungs sets in, HCQ is typically of no use and other treatments are far better. Excluding zinc is definitely detrimental to the drug's efficacy and doubling the dosage to 400mg does not produce better results but does increase the chance of heart arrhythmia.

I'm tired of the potential heart arrhythmia problems being used as an excuse to dismiss HCQ used with zinc. COVID 19 has shown itself to be a deadly disease to such an extent that someone taking the drug with a similar risk factor to the tens of millions of people already taking HCQ for arthritis or lupus is far better off as a COVID 19 patient given the drug's effectiveness compared to someone who does not take the drug. It's all about balancing the risks, and allowing a patient to progress into advanced stages of the disease without intervention is in my mind a poor evaluation of risk vs. benefit, given the results of the few studies that looked at both including zinc and giving the cocktail at first available opportunity.

Those of us following the HCQ story saw back in April how best to use this drug, and we are utterly dismayed that a proper double-blind study of HCQ with zinc, given at first symptoms, has never been done. Here we are in August and still no proper study has been done. The retroactive study I linked to earlier today suggests up to an 80% improvement in survivability if the right cocktail is given to patients at the right time. I agree with @dfwatt that it's a shame this drug has been politicized. My hope is that we can look beyond the politics and judge the proper use of the drug cocktail for what it is. It's essential, though, to separate studies that use HCQ properly and those that don't. Show me a study that administers 400mg doses to patients already in the ICU and excludes zinc, and I will show you a study done by someone who either wanted to show a negative result or lacked sufficient attention to detail to set up the study with protocols that could actually produce positive results.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Those of us following the HCQ story saw back in April how best to use this drug, and we are utterly dismayed that a proper double-blind study of HCQ with zinc, given at first symptoms, has never been done. Here we are in August and still no proper study has been done

I too am dismayed that this treatment was politicized, and probably it is part of the reason why this proper double-blind study has not been done. Hopefully something is in process but I'm not holding my breath.

My guess, though, is that such a study will show minimal or no benefit for COVID (I say this because I would have expected some signal with the proper non-retrospective/observational studies done so far), even when it is used exactly as recommended. But the point is: I have no idea, honestly. No idea at all. It would be nice to know the actual answer so we could move on. The continued lack of a crisp clear answer with a randomized controlled trial that everyone will believe (I'm not convinced this is possible anymore though no matter what is done) is probably costing lives through distraction and improper treatment, one way or another.

The biggest frustration that many of us who see promise in HCQ used for COVID 19 treatment is the lack of differentiation between the proper use of the drug and uses that long ago were proven unsuitable. The "proper" use of the drug involves low dose (200mg) HCQ, azithromycin or other suitable antibiotic, and zinc, given as early as possible once symptoms appear. Doctors have used discretion in administering the cocktail, giving to patients over 60 years of age, those with preexisting conditions, and those showing shortage of breath. Most young people do not need to be treated.

Certainly you are in agreement with Stella Immanuel on this one. I watched the Frontline Doctors video just for fun the other day and this appeared to be her biggest complaint (improper dosing, etc., wrong combo, wrong timing). She says she treated 350 patients with "great success." No idea who those patients were; obviously no evidence was provided. She said the doctors not using HCQ are like Germans in Nazi Germany (she called them Good Nazis, which seemed like an oxymoron, so I've used poetic license to rephrase here) who stood by and did nothing (since HCQ+zinc+zithromax is the cure). The video is nuts!

 

[byeLT4]

This HCQ talk really makes me feel like I went into a time portal and went back a few months.

No new info today in my county yet, but as of yesterday 57 new cases and 2 new deaths, 37 deaths total and 3,137 cases (active and recovered) in my county of 92k people.

 

[dhanson865]

This is from a nearby restaurant (about 10 miles away, in the same county but a different "city").

with the website updated to say

 

[linux-works]

This HCQ talk really makes me feel like I went into a time portal and went back a few months.

I suggest we switch topics and explore the fascinating world of 'demon rape' and 'astral projection sex'.

"I think they’re very respected doctors. There was a woman who was spectacular. I thought her voice was an important voice, but I know nothing about her. "

then again, she has the right idea about FB, so I'm willing to listen a bit more:

Twitter

 

[madodel]

So it really is demon semen.
The Mystery of Why Some People Keep Testing Positive for Covid-19

 

[TEG]

Link please to study with 320,000 patients. I scrolled up looking at recent replies to JRP and didn't see it.

Is it related to this? :
Safety of hydroxychloroquine, alone and in combination with azithromycin, in light of rapid wide-spread use for COVID-19: a multinational, network cohort and self-controlled case series study

 

[bkp_duke]

Is it related to this? :
Safety of hydroxychloroquine, alone and in combination with azithromycin, in light of rapid wide-spread use for COVID-19: a multinational, network cohort and self-controlled case series study

Good find. If that is the article in question, it's been pending peer review since April 8th (full original article with date here: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.08.20054551v1.full.pdf)

It also appears to be ONLY a safety study. There is no data at all reporting efficacy of HCQ in those treated.

The author's conclusions are:
"Short-term hydroxychloroquine treatment is safe, but addition of azithromycin may induce heart failure and cardiovascular mortality, potentially due to synergistic effects on QT length. We call for caution if such combination is to be used in the management of Covid-19"


EDIT - even on the safety side of things, the authors (in the discussion section) put forth some strong caution:
"Our results suggest that long-term use of HCQ leads to an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality, with no observable excess risk of major cardiovascular events or diagnosed bradycardia. Considering the current evidence, this may relate to cumulative effects of HCQ leading to an increased risk of QT lengthening or relate to the moderately increased risk of angina and heart failure seen. However, as the strong association observed with cardiovascular death is not observed with diagnosed arrhythmia or bradycardia in this study, sudden cardiovascular death here is more likely due to QT lengthening and undetected and/or sudden torsade-de-pointes. Although long-term treatment with HCQ is not expected for the management of COVID-19, some research suggests that higher doses as prescribed for COVID-19 can, even in the short-term, lead to equivalent side effects given the long half-life of HCQ."

 

[ZeApelido]

Bravo. I honestly can't tell if this is satire or not.
Assuming it's not.
Why have all the other governments in the world concluded that HCQ is not a miracle cure?
How do you explain doctors embrace of dexamethasone as a treatment for COVID-19?
Trump is in charge of all the federal government agencies that could expose the truth about HCQ. Does this prove that he is an ineffective leader?

I've changed my mind. I think @ZeApelido is joking. It's almost perfectly balanced. haha

Excellent. I did a good job then.

 

[dfwatt]

This is from a nearby restaurant (about 10 miles away, in the same county but a different "city").

with the website updated to say

View attachment 570720

Love it! I'll have to send these guys a free case of Moron Spray, on the house.

 

[Open Interest]

“Studies show.....” seems to be one of the more dangerous phrases in journalism. I’ve been wanting to learn more about medical studies and how findings are reported in the press. I found a free Coursera course called Understanding Medical Research - Your Facebook Friend is Wrong, offered by a Yale researcher and physician. I’ve found it fascinating and really informative.

 

[renim]

Re: HCQ,

To the extent, the medicine is about the patient's inflammation response to Covid19, lets consider Lupus treatments in reverse sequence.

Medications used to treat lupus

Nearly dead, use anti-coagulants
Not quite nearly dead, use immunosuppressives
Dying, use dexamethasone
Flare up, use prednisolone
Maintainence, use plaqaneil (HCQ)
Or maintainece use low dose prednisolone
And for minimal effect, take some aspirin or tylenol.

Excluding hospitalization, HCQ (alone) probably has some benefit vs Covid19 symptoms but not the virus itself, but its limited.

As a prophylactic agent HCQ probably has some benefit against the disease symptoms if not the infection itself, nevertheless, once somebody is sick enough to be hospitalized, the opportune time is passed, time to go for heavier medication like steroids.

Rightsaidfred had earlier posted about some drug used for capillarial inflammation, that would be interesting to followup on. (Dutch RCT)