Development on the Chloroquine front...
- Thread starter cosmickid
- Start date
It's not so much T.rump hatred as it is being a fanboi of the Chinavirus.Why do you hate Trump?
Why do you hate Trump?
If you've noticed.... he's stopped talking about it in the last week.... then his lapdogs in the RW echo chamber stopped talking about it.... then it magically stopped showing up here as well.
You mean the right-wing is now rooting for the virus?
That article is horseshit. Trump is mentioned in the sub-head, and the first sentence of the lead paragraph, so clearly politically motivated. Maybe we should wait for final judgements until the "more rigorous" NIH studies, which got a mention near the bottom of the article, are completed.
Trump full of it again, shocking.
The analysis actually shows that patients treated with the drug died at a higher rate than those treated with standard care.
https://theweek.com/speedreads/9101...roquine-does-not-benefit-coronavirus-patients
An anti-malaria drug touted by President Trump as a potential "game changer" to treat coronavirus showed no benefit for patients in the largest study of the drug to-date. The study found that the two primary outcomes for people treated with hydroxychloroquine were death and the need for mechanical ventilation.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...hrJ7LD2tCNZuyM5VjE_qcRS4KAzP2d226_ehfi1-mjvrA
https://theweek.com/speedreads/9101...y0nf44w6i3ZhNwhFxprWnl7_tDQR6od-zkEbCAnaxxsP8
The analysis actually shows that patients treated with the drug died at a higher rate than those treated with standard care.
https://theweek.com/speedreads/9101...roquine-does-not-benefit-coronavirus-patients
An anti-malaria drug touted by President Trump as a potential "game changer" to treat coronavirus showed no benefit for patients in the largest study of the drug to-date. The study found that the two primary outcomes for people treated with hydroxychloroquine were death and the need for mechanical ventilation.
https://thehill.com/policy/healthca...hrJ7LD2tCNZuyM5VjE_qcRS4KAzP2d226_ehfi1-mjvrA
https://theweek.com/speedreads/9101...y0nf44w6i3ZhNwhFxprWnl7_tDQR6od-zkEbCAnaxxsP8
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
I think you’d really struggle to make a cogent argument on what it is you think you saying.
Hoos was pointing out a semantic difference in my posts and I was trying to explain that despite my choice of words, my intention wasnt to "walk back". The difference didn't even occur to me.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
People should be ashamed of themselves. The inability of our educated people to think critically is pathetic.
Pharma experts far and wide said “hold your horses” on this...and the entire Team Trump didn’t listen.
please weigh in @Ladoga
LOL..... dude you need to get a grip.
NIH Panel Recommends Against Drug Combination Trump Has Promoted For COVID-19
https://www.npr.org/sections/corona...g-combination-trump-has-promoted-for-covid-19
There you all go again. No one is rooting against any solutions. We don't behave the way you would if a Democrat were in office, so stop projecting your worst qualities on us.
Today I had a telemedicine appointment with my family physician. The hospital that now owns his internal medicine practice requires that during the lock down he not bring patients into the office. It replaces my quarterly appointment that was scheduled for tomorrow. Mine is a very highly respected physician in this area. He told me that he has had 13 of his patients diagnosed with the virus. I had to ask if he used hydroxychloroquine. He responded that he prescribed it for every one of those 13. Currently, 4 remain hospitalized, 9 have recovered. The prognosis for the other 4 is that they will recover. He has had no deaths. I asked if he used it as a prophylactic. He does not only using it when the patient becomes ill enough to be hospitalized. I did not ask about dosage. No studies, no panels required or asked him to use it. He's a great doctor and uses his best medical judgement regarding what is in the patient's best interest and guess what. It works.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
With all due respect that is not enough data for me to say it works.
Hopefully some of the restrictions on telemedicine that have been lifted will become permanent.
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
There’s nothing wrong with his doctor trying. Trying is better than nothing. It’s his (@Ladoga ) refusal to understand scientific trials that is shameful.
All of us were hoping this would work. But the experts said it’s speculative at best. But the messiah said it would.
I have no problem with the doctor trying the medicine.
I'm also not to the point of saying it doesn't work.
Also all things being equal- see a family practice physician as opposed to an internal medicine doc.
I probably shouldn't have typed that but I've had a few beers already-so screw it.
Same here, as long as there is sufficient supply available for the diseases with actual evidence that it works.
Yes.... did you?
You are the one calling a VA study bullshit (the largest data point we have worldwide) because the media piece referencing the study mentioned Trump. How messed up is that?
I hope that it is found to be effective because it's cheap and it's pill which means it's easy to administer. If it doesn't and it turns out the remdesivirn or something else shows promise, I will cheer that on as well. Articles which begin with, 'that drug Trump likes isn't as good as he said it was" don't carry much sway.
It's insinuated that anyone questioning the motives of some people who do science means questioning science in general. Opinions of scientists don't equal data analysis.
Last edited:
Look, Trump was pushing hydroxychloroquine for days, almost as though he had a financial interest in it.
He should defer to scientists on matters of science and not veer into topics he knows absolutely nothing about.
And the drug that's showing promise is remdesivir.
Financial interest? Are you kidding me.
It is a multi source product.
When Trump "pushed" the hydroxy the adverse affects were not established by experience. Even now, those effects are also anecdotal. The NIH supports clinical trials of hydroxy and Z-pack. Its recommendation only has to do with use outside of monitored trials.
Why would you try it if the research is unclear? In some cases the trying itself leads to death. Seems like an additional risk without proved gain.
because in most cases the patients are already suffering and have concerning outlooks. If you were diagnosed with aggressive cancer and chemo didn’t work, wouldn’t you try dewormer? Or are you just going to pray or throw in the towel?
When you are pulled over by the police do you pull at a cnote and wave it in the cops face?
Fyi, many of the people taking this are not on death's edge.
remdesivir is also mixed so far (one favorable UC but some mediocre results from France).
yes, Trump is an idiot for saying most things the way he did.
scientists are failing us too (see WHO, Fauci, etc.) by giving a mix of nonchalant analyses and then worst-case and extreme or downside cases that cause panic.
That is a terrible analogy. the ones in the studies are not mildly symptomatic.
I said "almost as though..." That said, his obsession with the drug defies logic. And if you don't think he's been obsessed with it (although he's toned things down a bit the past week or so), you haven't been paying attention.
Yep I was thinking about that today when I came upon this story on the study on the yahoo platform. The other thing I noticed were all the comments talking about how "flawed" this study was. Oddly enough,those people commenting that the study was "flawed" were some of the most outspoken cheerleaders for this "cure" (and Trump) when there were NO studies, flawed or otherwise to even evaluate...Funny how that works LOL...
Similar threads
