Just a flu bro...literally

[WeToddDid2]

While this individual's anecdotal story may show it is effective; most large properly performed studies on HCQ (e.g. the VA) shows it is not effective for treating COVID-19.

I haven't seen a large properly performed study. Can you please post one?

My definition of a proper study would be HCQ + Zpak + zinc administered at the earliest time possible not when people are near death. Every anti-virus drug in the world works best when taken that the earliest possible time. If you are referring to a study in which people were given HCQ in later stages of the virus, I consider that study to not even be scientific , to be complete junk, and to be political propaganda.

For example, with respect to the remdesivir study, when was the drug administered? Was it at the earlist possible time or after the patents were intubated and near death as a last possible resort?

 

[gwb-trading]

I haven't seen a large properly performed study. Can you please post one?

There have been endless postings of HCQ studies and their results in this forum. Go look them up.

Here is the VA Study info - https://www.physiciansweekly.com/co...-increased-mortality-with-hydroxychloroquine/

Anecdotal evidence is not a study.

From my perspective there does not seem to be any double-blind study performed with HCQ which in many ways means that no "properly performed" study that meets FDA approval standards has been performed. Yet HCQ got FDA emergency approval use weeks back.

 

[WeToddDid2]

There have been endless postings of HCQ studies and their results in this forum. Go look them up.

Here is the VA Study info - https://www.physiciansweekly.com/co...-increased-mortality-with-hydroxychloroquine/

Anecdotal evidence is not a study.

From my perspective there does not seem to be any double-blind study performed with HCQ which in many ways means that no "properly performed" study that meets FDA approval standards has been performed. Yet HCQ got FDA emergency approval use weeks back.

The specific study has major flaws. Did you read it? Can it even be called a study?

IMO, that study should not be relied upon at all.

Again, it is well known that antiviral drugs work best when taken at the earliest possible onset of the disease. That is not the case with this study. These patients were already hospitalized. Hence, they were already really sick. It is almost like they planned on this retrospective analysis failing before they even performed it.

Secondly, they simply read the charts of the already really sick patients. As they state, they performed a retrospective analysis.

I do agree with the below highlighted part of the conclusion:

As you stated, there have been no double-blind studies performed, however, they do look to be forthcoming. Hopefully, we will finally have some reliable studies. The question is why in the hell aren't there any completed double-blind studies? How in the hell did the study for remdesivir get completed sooner?

However, the below results are the closets results to a large scale study that is out there to my knowledge. Obviously, it is not a double-blind study. The results below are of people that needed treatment. Therefore, the mortality rate is pretty impressive. It is not comparable the mortality rate that has been talked about on the forum recently because that is of the estimated total population.

 

[WeToddDid2]

There have been endless postings of HCQ studies and their results in this forum. Go look them up.

Here is the VA Study info - https://www.physiciansweekly.com/co...-increased-mortality-with-hydroxychloroquine/

Anecdotal evidence is not a study.

From my perspective there does not seem to be any double-blind study performed with HCQ which in many ways means that no "properly performed" study that meets FDA approval standards has been performed. Yet HCQ got FDA emergency approval use weeks back.

So, do you have any other studies? As I stated, I haven't seen one reliable study that concludes that HCQ + Zpak + zinc doesn't work.

 

[gwb-trading]

The specific study has major flaws. Did you read it? Can it even be called a study?

IMO, that study should not be relied upon at all.

You do realize that Dr Raoult and his studies have widely been debunked. He is pretty much just a B.S. artist. This has all been discussed recently on ET.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/didier-raoult-is-the-bs-artist-behind-trumps-miracle-drug

 

[gwb-trading]

Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine Likely Ineffective For COVID-19
https://www.contagionlive.com/news/chloroquine-hydroxychloroquine-ineffective-covid-19

There's No Quality Data Showing Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine Can Help COVID-19 Patients, Scientists Say
https://www.newsweek.com/theres-no-...hloroquine-can-help-covid-19-patients-1501135

Several new studies are raising fresh doubts on whether malaria pills should be used to treat the coronavirus, and a top US health agency just warned against widespread use
https://www.businessinsider.com/stu...droxychloroquine-as-covid-19-treatment-2020-4

There are still more studies starting....

COVID-19 Trial Explores Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine With and Without Azithromycin
https://www.technologynetworks.com/...oroquine-with-and-without-azithromycin-333935

 

[WeToddDid2]

You do realize that Dr Raoult and his studies have widely been debunked. He is pretty much just a B.S. artist. This has all been discussed recently on ET.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/didier-raoult-is-the-bs-artist-behind-trumps-miracle-drug

I did a better job at debunking that previous study than that article did of those results.

That article is a character assassination and it is not a debunking of the results. They offer no proof to debunk it.

Regardless, it is not a proper study. Hopefully, we will have good proper study soon.

 

[WeToddDid2]

Chloroquine, Hydroxychloroquine Likely Ineffective For COVID-19
https://www.contagionlive.com/news/chloroquine-hydroxychloroquine-ineffective-covid-19

There's No Quality Data Showing Hydroxychloroquine and Chloroquine Can Help COVID-19 Patients, Scientists Say
https://www.newsweek.com/theres-no-...hloroquine-can-help-covid-19-patients-1501135

Several new studies are raising fresh doubts on whether malaria pills should be used to treat the coronavirus, and a top US health agency just warned against widespread use
https://www.businessinsider.com/stu...droxychloroquine-as-covid-19-treatment-2020-4

There are still more studies starting....

COVID-19 Trial Explores Effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine With and Without Azithromycin
https://www.technologynetworks.com/...oroquine-with-and-without-azithromycin-333935

I just did a cursory review of the above articles. They basically state the same thing which is there's no high-quality evidence showing the medicines help patients with COVID-19. I agree with that. However, there is also no high-quality evidence showing the medicines don't help patients with COVID-19. There are numerous post on ET that state of infer that HCQ doesn't work. There is no proof of that. The articles also state that at high dosages HCQ is toxic which has been known for decades. Hell, most drugs are toxic at high dosages. Isn't that commonly known?

 

[Daxtrader]

 

[gwb-trading]

I just did a cursory review of the above articles. They basically state the same thing which is there's no high-quality evidence showing the medicines help patients with COVID-19. I agree with that. However, there is also no high-quality evidence showing the medicines don't help patients with COVID-19.

So the bottom line is that there are still many studies moving forward and more information will be obtained. In the meantime doctors in the U.S. are perfectly free to treat COVID-19 with hydroxychloroquine-based therapy.