ADVERTISEMENT

Development on the Chloroquine front...

INRanger27 said:
Ah the latest thrust in the War on Hydroxychloroquine - the false flag defense.
Click to expand...

Did anyone see Laura I- the Queen of Hydroxychloroquine, and her attack on remdesivir last night? At some point, you've really got to wonder what her motivation is, Financial, political, something else? It's pretty weird...

"Fox News host Laura Ingraham, who spent weeks endlessly promoting the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a possible coronavirus cure, downplayed data on Wednesday night that found another antiviral drug has shown actual promise as a treatment.

Noting that top infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci declared on Wednesday that results from a National Institutes of Health study into the Ebola drug remdesivir show a “clear-cut positive effect in diminishing time to recover,” Ingraham said that while it “certainly sounds encouraging” she’s not sure why Fauci wasn’t as bullish on hydroxychloroquine.

She went on to question the safety of remdesivir, which has been through numerous clinical trials over the years as an Ebola treatment. “We don’t know,” she stated. “It hasn’t been approved by the FDA. They might do emergency authorization. Hydroxychloroquine was approved decades ago.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fox-hydroxychloro-queen-laura-ingraham-042410184.html
 
cosmickid said:
Did anyone see Laura I- the Queen of Hydroxychloroquine, and her attack on remdesivir last night? At some point, you've really got to wonder what her motivation is, Financial, political, something else? It's pretty weird...

"Fox News host Laura Ingraham, who spent weeks endlessly promoting the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a possible coronavirus cure, downplayed data on Wednesday night that found another antiviral drug has shown actual promise as a treatment.

Noting that top infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci declared on Wednesday that results from a National Institutes of Health study into the Ebola drug remdesivir show a “clear-cut positive effect in diminishing time to recover,” Ingraham said that while it “certainly sounds encouraging” she’s not sure why Fauci wasn’t as bullish on hydroxychloroquine.

She went on to question the safety of remdesivir, which has been through numerous clinical trials over the years as an Ebola treatment. “We don’t know,” she stated. “It hasn’t been approved by the FDA. They might do emergency authorization. Hydroxychloroquine was approved decades ago.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fox-hydroxychloro-queen-laura-ingraham-042410184.html
Click to expand...
I've tried to watch Fox just to get an idea of what they are trying to deliver to the public. Usually I can only last 1/2 hour tops, it generally makes my head hurt to listen to the misinformation or the lack of information. Does anyone know if they actually believe what they are saying (or not saying)?
Are Hannity, Ingraham, The Goofy Couch Collection,... actually Kool Aid drinkers? Or do they just play shitty human beings on TV?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411 and outside shooter
cosmickid said:
Did anyone see Laura I- the Queen of Hydroxychloroquine, and her attack on remdesivir last night? At some point, you've really got to wonder what her motivation is, Financial, political, something else? It's pretty weird...

"Fox News host Laura Ingraham, who spent weeks endlessly promoting the anti-malarial drug hydroxychloroquine as a possible coronavirus cure, downplayed data on Wednesday night that found another antiviral drug has shown actual promise as a treatment.

Noting that top infectious disease expert Dr. Anthony Fauci declared on Wednesday that results from a National Institutes of Health study into the Ebola drug remdesivir show a “clear-cut positive effect in diminishing time to recover,” Ingraham said that while it “certainly sounds encouraging” she’s not sure why Fauci wasn’t as bullish on hydroxychloroquine.

She went on to question the safety of remdesivir, which has been through numerous clinical trials over the years as an Ebola treatment. “We don’t know,” she stated. “It hasn’t been approved by the FDA. They might do emergency authorization. Hydroxychloroquine was approved decades ago.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/fox-hydroxychloro-queen-laura-ingraham-042410184.html
Click to expand...
That anybody watches her show is highly confounding.
 
The latest on HCQ

Several people have pointed out this new preprint, a retrospective look at 568 patients in Wuhan. All of them were confirmed positive and on mechanical ventilation, median age 68, 63% male. 520 of them had standard of care (various antivirals and antibiotics), and in addition 48 patients were treated with 200mg hydroxychloroquine (b.i.d.) They measured hospital stay, mortality, and (interestingly) IL-6 levels as well. And their results were quite striking: mortality was 18.8% in the HCQ group and 45.8% in the others. That’s a much larger effect than anyone outside of Marseille has reported, I have to say. Patient IL-6 levels declined significantly in the treatment group, but not in the other cohort. The preprint’s Figure 3 also indicates that IL-6 went back up after hydroxychloroquine was discontinued.
 
Another update

https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/10.1161/CIRCEP.120.008662#.XrG-i8LBjDA.twitter

Abstract
Background - The novel SARs-CoV-2 coronavirus is responsible for the global COVID-19 pandemic. Small studies have shown a potential benefit of chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine ± azithromycin for the treatment of COVID-19. Use of these medications alone, or in combination, can lead to a prolongation of the QT interval, possibly increasing the risk of Torsade de pointes (TdP) and sudden cardiac death.

Methods - Hospitalized patients treated with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine ± azithromycin from March 1st through the 23rd at three hospitals within the Northwell Health system were included in this prospective, observational study. Serial assessments of the QT interval were performed. The primary outcome was QT prolongation resulting in TdP. Secondary outcomes included QT prolongation, the need to prematurely discontinue any of the medications due to QT prolongation and arrhythmogenic death.

Results - Two hundred one patients were treated for COVID-19 with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine. Ten patients (5.0%) received chloroquine, 191 (95.0%) received hydroxychloroquine and 119 (59.2%) also received azithromycin. The primary outcome of TdP was not observed in the entire population. Baseline QTc intervals did not differ between patients treated with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine (monotherapy group) vs. those treated with combination group (chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin) (440.6 ± 24.9 ms vs. 439.9 ± 24.7 ms, p =0.834). The maximum QTc during treatment was significantly longer in the combination group vs the monotherapy group (470.4 ± 45.0 ms vs. 453.3 ± 37.0 ms, p = 0.004). Seven patients (3.5%) required discontinuation of these medications due to QTc prolongation. No arrhythmogenic deaths were reported.

Conclusions - In the largest reported cohort of COVID-19 patients to date treated with chloroquine/hydroxychloroquine {plus minus} azithromycin, no instances of TdP or arrhythmogenic death were reported. Although use of these medications resulted in QT prolongation, clinicians seldomly needed to discontinue therapy. Further study of the need for QT interval monitoring is needed before final recommendations can be made.
 
Peer review under way. Baby steps.

Important advantages of using CQ or preferably HCQ in combination with zinc are the broad availability, affordability, and demonstrated efficacy and safety in approved and clinically established indications.​
 
Last edited:
I read back thru this thread. In my opinion, there was very good and thought provoking discussion. Folks did their research and their statements have held up.
Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are thought to prevent some viruses from multiplying-and to have immunomodulating effects.
But, where we stand right now, neither is proven effective for COVID-19.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Spartans9312 said:
I read back thru this thread. In my opinion, there was very good and thought provoking discussion. Folks did their research and their statements have held up.
Hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine are thought to prevent some viruses from multiplying-and to have immunomodulating effects.
But, where we stand right now, neither is proven effective for COVID-19.
Click to expand...
And some were ignoring the science and instead repeating partisan talking points.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartans9312
INRanger27 said:
And some were ignoring the science and instead repeating partisan talking points.
Click to expand...
There is most definitely a "do something" group. As well as a "first, do no harm" group (which is where I tend to be).
Supportive care remains the mainstay of treatment.
For now, hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine-with or without Zithromax- should not be used to prevent or treat COVID-19 in the community.
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Spartans9312 said:
There is most definitely a "do something" group. As well as a "first, do no harm" group (which is where I tend to be).
Supportive care remains the mainstay of treatment.
For now, hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine-with or without Zithromax- should not be used to prevent or treat COVID-19 in the community.
Click to expand...
...especially at the expense of patients that need it for its labeled indications.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bawlmer and Spartans9312
INRanger27 said:
...especially at the expense of patients that need it for its labeled indications.
Click to expand...
Yes, inappropriate use may prevent others from getting these meds for lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, or malaria.
Use of these meds in COVID-19 patients should be limited to patients in a clinical trial-or for some hospitalized patients.
We are going to see evidence keep flowing in. Perspective will be key.
The initial French report-which included 6 patients who "cleared" the virus after 6 days on hydroxychloroquine and Zithromax- is now being questioned.
 
CO. Hoosier said:
Partison talking points, huh. Are you suggesting "Trump touted" is not part of the official name of the drug? Who knew?
Click to expand...
Your mental masturbation is impressive whilst sad.

Yes, you red hat wearing fools all become pharma experts when New Jesus said the drug worked. Just one of a long list of scarlet T’s you’ll wear on your chest til Valhalla.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411, UncleMark and Circlejoe
The Strange Origins Of Trump’s Hydroxychloroquine Obsession

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trum...ronavirus-fox-news_n_5ebaffdbc5b65b5fd63dac80

Weeks before Trump first promoted the drug, a Twitter conversation about hydroxychloroquine between “philosopher” Adrian Bye and two cryptocurrency investors set off a chain of events that would bring the unproven drug to the attention of Elon Musk, Fox News pundits and Trump.
[...]
On March 11, cryptocurrency investors Gregory Rigano and James Todaro mused about coronavirus treatments and potential death tolls on Twitter to their then-small number of followers. Bye, who says he has been living in the Wudang Mountains in central China for the past few years and formerly interviewed tech “thought leaders” for his startup, responded to one of Todaro’s tweets about the virus.

“Chloroquine will keep most people out of hospital. The US hasn’t learned about that yet,” Bye replied to Todaro.

The three briefly discussed medical studies and a YouTube video about chloroquine’s use. As Politico has reported, Rigano asked Bye for more information about chloroquine and data on its uses before telling Todaro and Bye on March 12 that he would be “publishing a report tomorrow [with an] eminent scientist, peer reviewed.”​
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
INRanger27 said:
Your mental masturbation is impressive whilst sad.

Yes, you red hat wearing fools all become pharma experts when New Jesus said the drug worked. Just one of a long list of scarlet T’s you’ll wear on your chest til Valhalla.
Click to expand...
Didn't we ban blasphemy and insults to religious belief years ago on this board?
 
UncleMark said:
The Strange Origins Of Trump’s Hydroxychloroquine Obsession

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/trum...ronavirus-fox-news_n_5ebaffdbc5b65b5fd63dac80

Weeks before Trump first promoted the drug, a Twitter conversation about hydroxychloroquine between “philosopher” Adrian Bye and two cryptocurrency investors set off a chain of events that would bring the unproven drug to the attention of Elon Musk, Fox News pundits and Trump.
[...]
On March 11, cryptocurrency investors Gregory Rigano and James Todaro mused about coronavirus treatments and potential death tolls on Twitter to their then-small number of followers. Bye, who says he has been living in the Wudang Mountains in central China for the past few years and formerly interviewed tech “thought leaders” for his startup, responded to one of Todaro’s tweets about the virus.

“Chloroquine will keep most people out of hospital. The US hasn’t learned about that yet,” Bye replied to Todaro.

The three briefly discussed medical studies and a YouTube video about chloroquine’s use. As Politico has reported, Rigano asked Bye for more information about chloroquine and data on its uses before telling Todaro and Bye on March 12 that he would be “publishing a report tomorrow [with an] eminent scientist, peer reviewed.”​
Click to expand...
HCQ was also trialed with SARS and MERS. Why was there no backlash then?
 
Ladoga said:
Didn't we ban blasphemy and insults to religious belief years ago on this board?
Click to expand...
I don’t mean it in a blasphemous way (though I’d quibble that I as an irreligious person can’t blaspheme) nor do I mean it as an insult. It’s meant as metaphor for the blind hero worship bestowed on 45 by all too many in our society. If using Jesus as a metaphor is something you find insulting well then I’d encourage you to get over it and understand it isn’t an insult to Jesus.
 
INRanger27 said:
I don’t mean it in a blasphemous way (though I’d quibble that I as an irreligious person can’t blaspheme) nor do I mean it as an insult. It’s meant as metaphor for the blind hero worship bestowed on 45 by all too many in our society. If using Jesus as a metaphor is something you find insulting well then I’d encourage you to get over it and understand it isn’t an insult to Jesus.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure Ladoga was talking about your blasphemy of T.rump.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TheOriginalHappyGoat and UncleMark
Ladoga said:
Didn't we ban blasphemy and insults to religious belief years ago on this board?
Click to expand...
What you really mean is that you expect to have preferential treatment - privilege - for your religious beliefs and want to assert that privilege.

The fact is that Christianity has always understood that Christians will be persecuted for their beliefs. (see Acts and most of Paul's letters, particularly 2 Timothy 3:12) It's not something to use as a sword against others, but rather to use as a preparation - an internal strengthening - so that one is ready for the persecutions, ready to forgive those who persecute you, and ready to heal by having faith in Jesus.

Is that where you are? If not, I would invite you to do a little reflection about where you are in your faith . . . .
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bill4411
more info out today

details in this blog post: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/05/22/hydroxychloroquine-enough-already

This morning brings this paper from The Lancet. It’s a retrospective look at registered patients across 671 hospitals around the world, and it covers four patient groups: treatment with chloroquine, chloroquine plus a macrolide antibiotic (azithromycin, doxycycline), hydroxychloroquine, or hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide. All of these patients were started on these treatment regimens within 48 hours of diagnosis. The study specifically excludes those patients whose treatment started later, anyone whose therapy was started while they were on mechanical ventilation, or anyone received remdesivir as well. Early treatment in less severe patients only, in other words.

The mortality in the control group was 9.3%. The mortality in the chloroquine group was 16.4%. The mortality in the chloroquine plus macrolide group was 22.2%. The mortality in the hydroxychloroquine group was 18%. And the mortality in the hydroxychloroquine plus macrolide group was 23.8%.

Let’s look at cardiac arrhythmia. The 0.3% of the control group developed new arrhythmias during their hospitalization. But 4.3% of the chloroquine treatment group did. And 6.5% of the chloroquine plus macrolide group. As did 6.1% of the hydroxychloroquine group. And 8.1% of the hydroxychlorquine plus macrolide group.

There was no evidence whatsoever of any benefit with any of these treatment regimes.

There was significant evidence of harm.

In other news, a May 11 preprint from France that had claimed benefit for the combination was just withdrawn by the authors, who say that they are revising the manuscript.

It.
Doesn't.
Work,
Unfortunately.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UncleMark, sglowrider and Bill4411
outside shooter said:
more info out today

details in this blog post: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/05/22/hydroxychloroquine-enough-already

This morning brings this paper from The Lancet. It’s a retrospective look at registered patients across 671 hospitals around the world, and it covers four patient groups: treatment with chloroquine, chloroquine plus a macrolide antibiotic (azithromycin, doxycycline), hydroxychloroquine, or hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide. All of these patients were started on these treatment regimens within 48 hours of diagnosis. The study specifically excludes those patients whose treatment started later, anyone whose therapy was started while they were on mechanical ventilation, or anyone received remdesivir as well. Early treatment in less severe patients only, in other words.

The mortality in the control group was 9.3%. The mortality in the chloroquine group was 16.4%. The mortality in the chloroquine plus macrolide group was 22.2%. The mortality in the hydroxychloroquine group was 18%. And the mortality in the hydroxychloroquine plus macrolide group was 23.8%.

Let’s look at cardiac arrhythmia. The 0.3% of the control group developed new arrhythmias during their hospitalization. But 4.3% of the chloroquine treatment group did. And 6.5% of the chloroquine plus macrolide group. As did 6.1% of the hydroxychloroquine group. And 8.1% of the hydroxychlorquine plus macrolide group.

There was no evidence whatsoever of any benefit with any of these treatment regimes.

There was significant evidence of harm.

In other news, a May 11 preprint from France that had claimed benefit for the combination was just withdrawn by the authors, who say that they are revising the manuscript.

It.
Doesn't.
Work,
Unfortunately.
Click to expand...
Doxycycline is not a macride
 
Ladoga said:
Didn't we ban blasphemy and insults to religious belief years ago on this board?
Click to expand...

So you're saying the Trump Cult qualifies as a "religion"? Do you fools want tax breaks now as well? Set up your own "parochial schools"? Trump U qualifies for Tax breaks and can't be regulated? Is that how they avoid all the lawsuits?
 
Spartans9312 said:
Doxycycline is not a macride
Click to expand...
azithromycin is the macrolide.

imgsrv.fcgi


I looked at the paper. The alternative to azithromycin was actually clarithromycin (another macrolide), not doxycycline. A mistake in the blog post.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spartans9312
outside shooter said:
azithromycin is the macrolide.

imgsrv.fcgi


I looked at the paper. The alternative to azithromycin was actually clarithromycin (another macrolide), not doxycycline. A mistake in the blog post.
Click to expand...
I would think combining clarithromycin with HCQ would lead to more adverse effects than azithromycin with HCQ. Neither should be used for covid
 
  • Like
Reactions: anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
outside shooter said:
more info out today

details in this blog post: https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/05/22/hydroxychloroquine-enough-already

This morning brings this paper from The Lancet. It’s a retrospective look at registered patients across 671 hospitals around the world, and it covers four patient groups: treatment with chloroquine, chloroquine plus a macrolide antibiotic (azithromycin, doxycycline), hydroxychloroquine, or hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide. All of these patients were started on these treatment regimens within 48 hours of diagnosis. The study specifically excludes those patients whose treatment started later, anyone whose therapy was started while they were on mechanical ventilation, or anyone received remdesivir as well. Early treatment in less severe patients only, in other words.

The mortality in the control group was 9.3%. The mortality in the chloroquine group was 16.4%. The mortality in the chloroquine plus macrolide group was 22.2%. The mortality in the hydroxychloroquine group was 18%. And the mortality in the hydroxychloroquine plus macrolide group was 23.8%.

Let’s look at cardiac arrhythmia. The 0.3% of the control group developed new arrhythmias during their hospitalization. But 4.3% of the chloroquine treatment group did. And 6.5% of the chloroquine plus macrolide group. As did 6.1% of the hydroxychloroquine group. And 8.1% of the hydroxychlorquine plus macrolide group.

There was no evidence whatsoever of any benefit with any of these treatment regimes.

There was significant evidence of harm.

In other news, a May 11 preprint from France that had claimed benefit for the combination was just withdrawn by the authors, who say that they are revising the manuscript.

It.
Doesn't.
Work,
Unfortunately.
Click to expand...
That's an unfortunate result. I'm wondering why the mortality rates in the trial were so high?
 
Spartans9312 said:
I would think combining clarithromycin with HCQ would lead to more adverse effects than azithromycin with HCQ. Neither should be used for covid
Click to expand...
It is arguably standard-of-care for pneumonia, though, so the logic as i understand it is that it can thwart the secondary bacterial infection, which can amplify the inflammatory response post COVID19 infection.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MyTeamIsOnTheFloor

The Louisville Shooter Had All The Advantages

Replies
19
Views
433
The Water Cooler
larsIU
larsIU
S

Zuzalu? Rhode Island? No than you . . . .

Replies
16
Views
905
The Water Cooler
CO. Hoosier
CO. Hoosier
Thyrsis

Why don't we want and why can't we have nice things?

Replies
165
Views
4K
The Water Cooler
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
A
B

Covid update from a doc on the front lines

Replies
219
Views
5K
The Water Cooler
jet812
J
outside shooter

3 new scientific studies reach the same conclusion on COVID-19’s origin

Replies
164
Views
5K
The Water Cooler
i'vegotwinners
I
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back