Jump to content
BANGKOK
rooster59

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

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, candide said:

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

Here is more about China's work at that time from a joint Chinese/Marseille University Public Health Department paper. Chinese Guidelines related to NovelCoronavirus Pneumonia.

 

Conclusions: China has generated a plethora of guidelines covering almost all aspects of COVID-19. Chloroquine, as one widely affordable treatment, holds great potential to become the gold standard choice as more clinical evidence is shared by researchers from China as well as other countries.

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, candide said:

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! 😉

I think most scientists trust Chinese scientists, its the CCP that's toxic.  (I would trust bat woman, but I would wear a mask)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, candide said:

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

That might be true, but it should be obvious that he, Trump, was taking it only for prophylactic purposes because he does not have a Covid-19 infection (yet?), as far as we know. I believe he began taking the drug after a couple of people in the White House had been tested positive for the virus. 

 

Apparently Trump is no longer taking the drug because of the increasing but inconsistent evidence of its effectiveness, which is a reasonable response. 😉

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

That might be true, but it should be obvious that he, Trump, was taking it only for prophylactic purposes because he does not have a Covid-19 infection (yet?), as far as we know. I believe he began taking the drug after a couple of people in the White House had been tested positive for the virus. 

 

Apparently Trump is no longer taking the drug because of the increasing but inconsistent evidence of its effectiveness, which is a reasonable response. 😉

"increasing but inconsistent evidence of its effectiveness"

Believe whatever you want, but the facts don't support this belief.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, stevenl said:

"increasing but inconsistent evidence of its effectiveness"

Believe whatever you want, but the facts don't support this belief.

You seem very confused. Some of the facts don't support this belief, but some of the facts do. Therefore it is a fact that the evidence is inconsistent. The belief itself, in the effectiveness of a particular drug, also has some effectiveness in reality. It's called the placebo effect. It's estimated that about 30% of the effectiveness of all drugs administered or recommended by doctors is due to a placebo effect, that is, a belief that the drug works.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

You seem very confused. Some of the facts don't support this belief, but some of the facts do. Therefore it is a fact that the evidence is inconsistent. The belief itself, in the effectiveness of a particular drug, also has some effectiveness in reality. It's called the placebo effect. It's estimated that about 30% of the effectiveness of all drugs administered or recommended by doctors is due to a placebo effect, that is, a belief that the drug works.

You make a claim 'increasing evidence of its effectiveness'. There is afaik no increasing evidence of its effectiveness, and your answer does not support your claim.

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, stevenl said:

You make a claim 'increasing evidence of its effectiveness'. There is afaik no increasing evidence of its effectiveness, and your answer does not support your claim.

Okay! I see the problem. This is what I wrote. "increasing but inconsistent evidence of its effectiveness".

 

Perhaps I should have written, "increasingly inconsistent evidence of its effectiveness". In other words, as time progresses, more studies are conducted but the inconsistency of the results continues because of the complexity of the issue due to different individual reactions to the drug, and the difficulty of conducting controlled experiments.

 

As I recall, Trump asked his doctor if he should take Hydroxyquinoline, before he decided to take it. The doctor replied, 'Take it if you really want to, and if it makes you feel good', or something along those lines. I would deduce that Trump's doctor understood that there was uncertainty about the drug's efficacy in protection against Covid-19, but he also understood it could have a placebo effect even if the evidence eventually became clear that Hydroxyquinoline, on balance, had no benefit in preventing Covid-19 infection.

 

There is also the issue of the Zinc supplements that were combined with Hydroxyquinoline. I've read reports that the role of Hydroxyquinoline, in relation to Covid-19, is to facilitate the absorption of Zinc into the human cells. There are claims that it is the Zinc that destroys the virus, not Hydroxyquinoline.

 

Everything clear now? 😉

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Okay! I see the problem. This is what I wrote. "increasing but inconsistent evidence of its effectiveness".

 

Perhaps I should have written, "increasingly inconsistent evidence of its effectiveness". In other words, as time progresses, more studies are conducted but the inconsistency of the results continues because of the complexity of the issue due to different individual reactions to the drug, and the difficulty of conducting controlled experiments.

 

As I recall, Trump asked his doctor if he should take Hydroxyquinoline, before he decided to take it. The doctor replied, 'Take it if you really want to, and if it makes you feel good', or something along those lines. I would deduce that Trump's doctor understood that there was uncertainty about the drug's efficacy in protection against Covid-19, but he also understood it could have a placebo effect even if the evidence eventually became clear that Hydroxyquinoline, on balance, had no benefit in preventing Covid-19 infection.

 

There is also the issue of the Zinc supplements that were combined with Hydroxyquinoline. I've read reports that the role of Hydroxyquinoline, in relation to Covid-19, is to facilitate the absorption of Zinc into the human cells. There are claims that it is the Zinc that destroys the virus, not Hydroxyquinoline.

 

Everything clear now? 😉

Please don't try to make this about placebos when it was not. You wrote 'increasing evidence', now you're saying that was incorrect, is that correct because you meant to write 'inconsistent evidence'?

 

And please, don't talk about the doctor's reply on Trump taking medicine, all you have for that is Trump's words.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, stevenl said:

Please don't try to make this about placebos when it was not. You wrote 'increasing evidence', now you're saying that was incorrect, is that correct because you meant to write 'inconsistent evidence'?

 

And please, don't talk about the doctor's reply on Trump taking medicine, all you have for that is Trump's words.

I wrote 'increasing but inconsistent evidence'. Why are you distorting what I wrote? Don't you understand 'inconsistent'? The evidence is increasing on both sides. The jury is still out.

 

Personally I'm not at all interested in promoting the use of Hydroxyquinoline in the absence of rigorous scientific studies, and I'm not American, and I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm just interested in the objective truth.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

I wrote 'increasing but inconsistent evidence'. Why are you distorting what I wrote? Don't you understand 'inconsistent'? The evidence is increasing on both sides. The jury is still out.

 

Personally I'm not at all interested in promoting the use of Hydroxyquinoline in the absence of rigorous scientific studies, and I'm not American, and I'm not a Trump supporter. I'm just interested in the objective truth.

Increasing but inconsistent evidence of effectiveness means increasing evidence of effectiveness. It is not.

But now it is clear you didn't mean to write increasing evidence, so all clear.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, stevenl said:

Increasing but inconsistent evidence of effectiveness means increasing evidence of effectiveness. It is not.

But now it is clear you didn't mean to write increasing evidence, so all clear.

Looks like I'll have to play the role of English teacher. 😄

 

Increasing but inconsistent evidence of effectiveness means 'increasing evidence of effectiveness plus increasing evidence of non-effectiveness, meaning the jury is still out.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

Looks like I'll have to play the role of English teacher. 😄

 

Increasing but inconsistent evidence of effectiveness means 'increasing evidence of effectiveness plus increasing evidence of non-effectiveness, meaning the jury is still out.

No, your English is lacking.

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, stevenl said:

No, your English is lacking.

How is your Math? If I were to write, 'Two plus two equals four', would it be sensible to claim that I wrote, 'Two equals four'🤣

 

Sometimes people respond to a post by quoting just one paragraph or one sentence out of context, and that does sometimes raise reasonable objections. However, quoting a sentence whilst also removing a critical and significant word from that sentence, is ridiculous. 🤣

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, VincentRJ said:

How is your Math? If I were to write, 'Two plus two equals four', would it be sensible to claim that I wrote, 'Two equals four'🤣

 

Sometimes people respond to a post by quoting just one paragraph or one sentence out of context, and that does sometimes raise reasonable objections. However, quoting a sentence whilst also removing a critical and significant word from that sentence, is ridiculous. 🤣

So now you're equating English to maths, in a poor attempt to distract from your poor expression here. 'Increasing but inconsistent evidence of its effectiveness' means there is increasing evidence. Unfortunately there is not increasing evidence.

Edited by stevenl

Share this post


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...