Jump to content

Drug touted by Trump to treat COVID-19 linked to higher death risk - study


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 213
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Exactly, factual reporting of research.

this article is misleading    It deals specifically with those already infected and severely ill with CV-19 and shows that it offers nothing towards fighting the disease and puts patients al

Surprise, surprise... More crazy talk from Trump haters...   Do you think Trump woke up one day and decided hydroxychloroquine would help people with covid-19 infections.   ALL of

Posted Images

Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, connda said:

And that "major clinical trail" was retracted from the journal that published it due to "After publication of our Lancet Article,

Do your due diligence. Different trial altogether.

 

 

Edited by Phil McCaverty
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Phil McCaverty said:

I don't call a study by Oxford University, one of the worlds leading virology research labs, and the NHS irrational, unhinged and outrageous.

 

It certainly is dangerous. many cases of it causing cardiac arrhythmia, sometimes resulting in death.

 

Maybe you could try it to see if it cures your TDS.

You lost this one before you started. 

 

But being in the orange man bad cult really doesn't require any reason to deal with reality, all it takes is pure unbridled hatred. 

 

4 more years will really bring out the banshee in you. 

 

Which is hilarious 

  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, VincentRJ said:

Trump was not using the drug because he was one of the sickest patients. He was using it as a prophylactic in conjunction with a Zinc supplement because there was some scientific evidence that hydroxychloroquine with Zinc might reduce his risk of infection.

 

There's a distinction to be made between a 'cure for the very sick', and a 'prevention of sickness'. I've seen no sound scientific studies that prove that Hydroxyquinoline with Zinc has no prophylactic effect against Covid-19 infection.

When Trump touted this drug, he never specified it was for prophylactic use only.

Edited by candide
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Phil McCaverty said:

And here's the latest study by NHS in conjunction with Oxford University, who are likely to produce the first approved vaccine and are one of the worlds leading (if not the leading) virology research centres. Case closed.

 

https://www.statnews.com/2020/06/05/hydroxychloroquine-had-no-benefit-for-hospitalized-covid-19-patients-possibly-closing-door-to-use-of-drug/

 

"A major clinical trial showed the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine had no benefit for patients hospitalized with Covid-19, likely closing the door to the use of the highly publicized medicine in the sickest patients — a use for which it was widely prescribed as the pandemic hit the U.S."

 

So will you apologise (and Trump) for promoting a dangerous and completely useless drug?

 

 

After reading the OP, it is safer to wait that the scientific community checks the validity of this study.

However, at first glance, it seems to have been quite seriously conducted:

"A total of 1,542 received hydroxychloroquine, and 3,132 received usual care. After 28 days of treatment, 25.7% of those on hydroxychloroquine and 23.5% of those received usual care had died, meaning those on hydroxychloroquine were 11% more likely to die. That difference was not statistically significant.

There was “no beneficial effect” on how long patients stayed in the hospital, or on other outcomes."

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 5/23/2020 at 9:05 AM, johnnybangkok said:

Surprise, surprise Trump, the eminent virologist and world class scientist has got it wrong.

Who would have guessed?

 

Trump fits the bill here.....a cockwomble:

 

Cockwomble (noun) – A person, usually male, prone to making outrageously stupid statements and/or inappropriate behavior while generally having a very high opinion of his own wisdom and importance.

Edited by xylophone
  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, connda said:

And that "major clinical trail" was retracted from the journal that published it due to "After publication of our Lancet Article,

several concerns were raised with respect to the veracity of the data and analyses conducted by Surgisphere Corporation and its founder and our co-author, Sapan Desai, in our publication. We launched an independent third-party peer review of Surgisphere with the consent of Sapan Desai to evaluate the origination of the database elements, to confirm the completeness of the database, and to replicate the analyses presented in the paper."

The bottom line is that the researchers would not provide their data for an independent peer review by the publisher, and as such the publication was retracted, officially, by the publisher. 

I prefer the hard science over the opinion pieces and main-stream news sound-bites that people pull out of their butts for partisan politics. 

I dislike Trump as much as I dislike partisan politics, but I dislike fraudulent science even more.

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(20)31180-6/fulltext

I'm surprised due diligence wasn't performed prior to publication (peer review was done but apparently data was not checked) with the worldwide implications involved. What was once a credible source in the past needs to questioned consistently now - a new world indeed..

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sujo said:

And trump based his statement that its ok and cant hurt on what?

The Chinese were doing it.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Phil McCaverty said:

Do your due diligence. Different trial altogether.

 

 

Of course it was.

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, rabas said:

The Chinese were doing it.

From Feb. 29, it has been forbidden in China for patients over 65.

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, candide said:

After reading the OP, it is safer to wait that the scientific community checks the validity of this study.

However, at first glance, it seems to have been quite seriously conducted:

"A total of 1,542 received hydroxychloroquine, and 3,132 received usual care. After 28 days of treatment, 25.7% of those on hydroxychloroquine and 23.5% of those received usual care had died, meaning those on hydroxychloroquine were 11% more likely to die. That difference was not statistically significant.

There was “no beneficial effect” on how long patients stayed in the hospital, or on other outcomes."

No zinc.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, candide said:

From Feb. 29, it has been forbidden in China for patients over 65.

They (the Chinese) did not forbid it. That only appears in the usual anti-Trump MSM sources.

 

It was simply one of several recommendations in their 7th bulletin update. Another recommended high doses of chloroquine, 1 gram per day. They also recommend that patients should take less than three anti viral drugs. Nothing anti-Trump.

 

 

Edited by rabas
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, rabas said:

They (the Chinese) did not forbid it. That only appears in the usual anti-Trump MSM sources.

 

It was simply one of several recommendations in their 7th bulletin update. Another recommended high doses of chloroquine, 1 gram per day. They also recommend that patients should take less than three anti viral drugs. Nothing anti-Trump.

 

 

Ok not forbidden, only not recommended.

Anyway, it's interesting  to learn that by mid-March, according to you, Trump was still trusting the Chinese! 😉

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...