Did you read the entire thing? Near the end people are calling this sensational fake news. The op agrees but don't want to delete the tweets just to keep a trail. I was wondering wtf is going on with the half syringe antibiotic thing. As a hospital pharmacist, that was the biggest clue about this being fake or overly exaggerated.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Coronavirus
- Thread starter Wenche
- Start date
Did you read the entire thing? Near the end people are calling this sensational fake news. The op agrees but don't want to delete the tweets just to keep a trail. I was wondering wtf is going on with the half syringe antibiotic thing. As a hospital pharmacist, that was the biggest clue about this being fake or overly exaggerated.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
You know it's serious when Ireland closes its pubs. 
Government orders all pubs to close and advises against house parties
edit: forgot I got that from a comment from this
Austria bans gatherings of more than five people over coronavirus
Government orders all pubs to close and advises against house parties
edit: forgot I got that from a comment from this
Austria bans gatherings of more than five people over coronavirus
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
I read it, but the important part is the actual data. They don't even link the article they are talking about on that page.
Literally it is a guy named Sun saying he's tried this drug in 100 patients. . .
And this was back on Feb 18th. It's been a month, I would have expected swift follow up if they had actionable data.
Time for me to head back to pubmed and dig around to see if there is any validity to this.
San Francisco has banned ALL visitors—including family members—from visiting patients in all hospitals throughout the city. Only exception is for 1 registered partner or family member for an expected mother. Although, this brings up the topic of what happened in UK, where a second known case of a newborn was tested to be COVID positive.
As I recall rdalcanto mentioned happened to him, elective cases are canceled and surgeons will spend the extra time helping out with COVID.
Currently listening to a call from local hospital leaders around SF area..... There are just under 800 ventilators available in hospitals throughout CA at the current moment.
As I recall rdalcanto mentioned happened to him, elective cases are canceled and surgeons will spend the extra time helping out with COVID.
Currently listening to a call from local hospital leaders around SF area..... There are just under 800 ventilators available in hospitals throughout CA at the current moment.
Chloroquine is a promising treatment. Our infectious disease specialists looked at all the data and have informed us our hospital of 1000 beds are fully stocked of hydroxychloroquine(the alternative) earlier last week.
CDC recommends canceling events with 50 or more people for the next eight weeks throughout US
CDC recommends canceling events with 50 or more people for the next eight weeks throughout US
CDC recommends canceling events with 50 or more people for the next eight weeks throughout US
Thanks for the heads-up. Because it is a second-hand source and at least some of the information appears to be inaccurate I've reported my earlier post and asked the mods to delete it so we can get information from more reliable sources.
There's another issue in all this and that is simply the way in which clinicians in the trenches simply have to try things in patients who are failing even if they don't have the gold standard of a whole bunch of successful double-blind placebo-controlled trials for that particular agent. If someone's dying or looks like they're headed down the tubes and you don't do anything, quoting side effects of a treatment that may have helped but was never tried doesn't exactly impress family members or make the doctor feel any better either for that matter. Sometimes you simply have to take your best shot even if that in some sense is a shot in the dark. And also obviously, a frank discussion about how this is simply a shot in the dark but doing nothing may not be an option and reviewing all this with the family is critical to get to a place of at least some kind of consensual validation that this makes sense, given the lack of better options. Wouldn't you agree? Every clinician dealing with life-threatening conditions finds themselves in this situation sooner or later.
Last edited:
It's on the list of drugs the UK banned parallel export of, and hoarding of.
UK bans parallel export and hoarding of three Covid-19 drugs
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
COVID-10 and Chloroquine
Did a pubmed search:
chloroquine covid-19 - PubMed - NCBI
10 results (that's not good - there should be much more if this worked)
From bottom to top (newest to oldest)
10 - This is an abstract (unpublished paper or poster) - it shows in vitro inhibition of infection into Vero E6 cell lines by therapeutic doses of Remdesivir and high doses of Chloroquine. Because this is an abstract, the authors have not made any comments on their data or conclusions. The data set is from a single set of experiments. This, however, is a very reputable journal.
9 - This is an editorial, not a research article. The authors report the in vitro data, and recommend follow up by randomized control trials. No treatment recommendation is made.
8 - Another editorial referencing back to the original Chinese clinical "trial" of 100 patients to which @bhzmark referred. No data presented.
7 - Additional editorial referencing back to original Chinese trial. No data presented.
6 - Unrelated article describing how to disseminate information from clinical trials. No data presented.
5 - Yet another editorial referencing back to original Chinese trial. No data presented.
4 - Review article - this is the best summary found to date of the history of chloroquine, the pros and cons, and the Chinese data, specifically this paragraph is a great primer:
"The in vitro antiviral activity of chloroquine has been identified since the late 1960's (Inglot, 1969; Miller and Lenard, 1981; Shimizu et al., 1972) and the growth of many different viruses can be inhibited in cell culture by both chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, including the SARS coronavirus (Keyaerts et al., 2004). Some evidence for activity in mice has been found for a variety of viruses, including human coronavirus OC43 (Keyaerts et al., 2009), enterovirus EV-A71 (Tan et al., 2018), Zika virus (Li et al., 2017) and influenza A H5N1 (Yan et al., 2013). However, chloroquine did not prevent influenza infection in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial (Paton et al., 2011), and had no effect on dengue-infecteds patient in a randomized controlled trial in Vietnam (Tricou et al., 2010). Chloroquine was also active ex vivo but not in vivo in the case of ebolavirus in mice (Dowall et al., 2015; Falzarano et al., 2015), Nipah (Pallister et al., 2009) and influenza virus (Vigerust and McCullers, 2007) in ferrets."
The authors of #4 further go on to make the following statement:
"This would represent the first successful use of chloroquine in humans for the treatment of an acute viral disease, and is undoubtedly excellent news, since this drug is cheap and widely available. However, it should be considered carefully before drawing definitive conclusions, since no data has been provided yet to support this announcement."
BASICALLY - THE CHINESE SAY THEY HAVE DONE A TRIAL OF 100 PEOPLE, AND SEE SOME EFFECT, BUT HAVE NOT SHARED THEIR DATA. In the scientific community, not sharing your data so that others can reproduce your results is one of the biggest red flags there is. These authors call out the Chinese researchers on this:
"In conclusion, the option of using chloroquine in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 should be examined with attention in light of the recent promising announcements, but also of the potential detrimental effect of the drug observed in previous attempts to treat acute viral diseases. We urge Chinese scientists to report the interim trial results currently running in China as soon as they are available. This should be preferentially done in a peer-reviewed publication with detailed information to allow the international scientific community to analyse the results, to confirm in prospective trials the efficacy of the proposed treatment and to guide future clinical practice."
3 - Yet another editorial referencing back to original Chinese trial.
2 - An in vitro study showing antiviral properties (we know this, nothing new is present here).
1 - These are the Chinese researchers making their recommendation for the use of Chloroquine, but they do not publish their actual data.
Does anyone have the ACTUAL original data from the Chinese researchers? Because everything I can find appears to go back to that one study of 100 patients, and then everyone is re-hashing the report and putting their own spin on it.
SHOW ME THE DATA!!!!
Did a pubmed search:
chloroquine covid-19 - PubMed - NCBI
10 results (that's not good - there should be much more if this worked)
From bottom to top (newest to oldest)
10 - This is an abstract (unpublished paper or poster) - it shows in vitro inhibition of infection into Vero E6 cell lines by therapeutic doses of Remdesivir and high doses of Chloroquine. Because this is an abstract, the authors have not made any comments on their data or conclusions. The data set is from a single set of experiments. This, however, is a very reputable journal.
9 - This is an editorial, not a research article. The authors report the in vitro data, and recommend follow up by randomized control trials. No treatment recommendation is made.
8 - Another editorial referencing back to the original Chinese clinical "trial" of 100 patients to which @bhzmark referred. No data presented.
7 - Additional editorial referencing back to original Chinese trial. No data presented.
6 - Unrelated article describing how to disseminate information from clinical trials. No data presented.
5 - Yet another editorial referencing back to original Chinese trial. No data presented.
4 - Review article - this is the best summary found to date of the history of chloroquine, the pros and cons, and the Chinese data, specifically this paragraph is a great primer:
"The in vitro antiviral activity of chloroquine has been identified since the late 1960's (Inglot, 1969; Miller and Lenard, 1981; Shimizu et al., 1972) and the growth of many different viruses can be inhibited in cell culture by both chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine, including the SARS coronavirus (Keyaerts et al., 2004). Some evidence for activity in mice has been found for a variety of viruses, including human coronavirus OC43 (Keyaerts et al., 2009), enterovirus EV-A71 (Tan et al., 2018), Zika virus (Li et al., 2017) and influenza A H5N1 (Yan et al., 2013). However, chloroquine did not prevent influenza infection in a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial (Paton et al., 2011), and had no effect on dengue-infecteds patient in a randomized controlled trial in Vietnam (Tricou et al., 2010). Chloroquine was also active ex vivo but not in vivo in the case of ebolavirus in mice (Dowall et al., 2015; Falzarano et al., 2015), Nipah (Pallister et al., 2009) and influenza virus (Vigerust and McCullers, 2007) in ferrets."
The authors of #4 further go on to make the following statement:
"This would represent the first successful use of chloroquine in humans for the treatment of an acute viral disease, and is undoubtedly excellent news, since this drug is cheap and widely available. However, it should be considered carefully before drawing definitive conclusions, since no data has been provided yet to support this announcement."
BASICALLY - THE CHINESE SAY THEY HAVE DONE A TRIAL OF 100 PEOPLE, AND SEE SOME EFFECT, BUT HAVE NOT SHARED THEIR DATA. In the scientific community, not sharing your data so that others can reproduce your results is one of the biggest red flags there is. These authors call out the Chinese researchers on this:
"In conclusion, the option of using chloroquine in the treatment of SARS-CoV-2 should be examined with attention in light of the recent promising announcements, but also of the potential detrimental effect of the drug observed in previous attempts to treat acute viral diseases. We urge Chinese scientists to report the interim trial results currently running in China as soon as they are available. This should be preferentially done in a peer-reviewed publication with detailed information to allow the international scientific community to analyse the results, to confirm in prospective trials the efficacy of the proposed treatment and to guide future clinical practice."
3 - Yet another editorial referencing back to original Chinese trial.
2 - An in vitro study showing antiviral properties (we know this, nothing new is present here).
1 - These are the Chinese researchers making their recommendation for the use of Chloroquine, but they do not publish their actual data.
Does anyone have the ACTUAL original data from the Chinese researchers? Because everything I can find appears to go back to that one study of 100 patients, and then everyone is re-hashing the report and putting their own spin on it.
SHOW ME THE DATA!!!!
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
Absolutely, I agree. I have done compassionate care usages and sometimes you just have to go with what you have (as long as it does no harm).
My beef is that I keep seeing rehashes of anecdotal reports, and we all know that those can be the worst possible kinds of a recommendations. Like above, there are 10 reports of covid-19 and chloroquine when you do a pubmed search, but if you actually dig into it things all come back to either in vitro results, or a case series of 100 patients (not a RCT, a blood case series) out of China and the data is no where to be found. There have been calls from the scientific community for the original data set, and it still has not been published.
bkp_duke
Well-Known Member
WTH. Why does the Vatican show 800,000+ deaths? Someone hitting the sauce when they updated the stats?
Well, if you’re desperate, you could just lick some galvanized sheet metal (at home of course, not in a public place
).I'm getting really frustrated with the testing.
My biggest complaint through this whole ordeal has been the lack of testing. But, the tests themselves seem inconsistent. Here an example of a doctor that's currently in critical condition who had a negative test result on Tuesday, and a positive one on Friday. As far as I can tell from the article he was symptomatic during the entire time.
EvergreenHealth doctor tests positive for coronavirus, in critical condition
My biggest complaint through this whole ordeal has been the lack of testing. But, the tests themselves seem inconsistent. Here an example of a doctor that's currently in critical condition who had a negative test result on Tuesday, and a positive one on Friday. As far as I can tell from the article he was symptomatic during the entire time.
EvergreenHealth doctor tests positive for coronavirus, in critical condition
Last edited:
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
It is nothing, unless you provide exertion context. And even then fitness and fatness are not mutually exclusive.
However,
Walk outside. Do you see hulks or pot bellies ?
Causalien
Prime 8 ball Oracle
Similar threads
