Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I hope he's right, but things like "controversial professor" and other scientists saying "the testing was not carried out in a controlled study and the results were purely 'observational'" are not encouraging.
I suspect we'll see far more useful data coming out of New York. Right?
Wow! Awesome. Ive read the healthcare workers get 1st divs, which make sense.
As soon as these meds become readily available, I'll get them, then end my quaratine, and go to social distancing, and all the other precautions. We are not high risk though, and live in sparsely populated area.
I hope he's right, but things like "controversial professor" and other scientists saying "the testing was not carried out in a controlled study and the results were purely 'observational'" are not encouraging.
How long until they can make a formal study that is more diagnostic?
Serious question - can you tell me where this idea that it's a dangerous drug came from?
It's been in use for several decades to treat a variety of conditions, from malaria to lupus. I don't follow mainstream news narratives, so if that's where it came from, that would make a lot of sense. I do genuinely want to know where everyone's getting this idea, though.
I recall hearing something about "two grams can kill a person" which is 10x the normal dosage - of course a person shouldn't take 10x the recommended/prescribed dosage, of anything. Other than that, I'm at a loss as to where people are getting this idea. I'm sure it's not as safe as Tylenol, fine, but your statement above indicates that you think it's far more dangerous than it's worth, to try it and see if it works for some people.
Because someone drank fish bowl cleaner, or some kind of anti parasitic fish medication. Whatever it was they took, it said "not for human consumption" and the person took it anyways. And people are using this as yet another excuse to attack Trump, and the medication he claimed was showing promising results.
Israel is the world’s largest producer of generic Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients and the source of this medication.
Are you trying to say that it is a generic drug and that many various companies make it...including maybe Teva?
Novartis has pledged 130 million, Teva 10 and Mylan many more. Bayer has made it - IPCA (massive Indian Pharma) as well as MANY Chinese and other companies.
"Cadila Healthcare Ltd., the Indian company that is the world’s largest maker of the drug"
We must be VERY careful, of course:
"An article published this week in the Mayo Clinic Proceedings warns that both drugs could prompt dangerous and potentially deadly heart arrhythmias in the 3 million people worldwide who have a congenital cardiac condition — called long syndrome — that can cause the heart to beat erratically and lead to sudden death."
Turns out that those who take anti-depressants are also indicated as dangerous to give this to, as are users of some 60 or so other drugs that may interact with it.
Israel isn't even in the top 15 of medication exporting countries by $$ (Germany is #1 by a long shot).
Serious question - can you tell me where this idea that it's a dangerous drug came from?
It's been in use for several decades to treat a variety of conditions, from malaria to lupus. I don't follow mainstream news narratives, so if that's where it came from, that would make a lot of sense. I do genuinely want to know where everyone's getting this idea, though.
I recall hearing something about "two grams can kill a person" which is 10x the normal dosage - of course a person shouldn't take 10x the recommended/prescribed dosage, of anything. Other than that, I'm at a loss as to where people are getting this idea. I'm sure it's not as safe as Tylenol, fine, but your statement above indicates that you think it's far more dangerous than it's worth, to try it and see if it works for some people.
It it not a harmless drug. I was taking it in the 1980s to prevent malaria (we lived in malaria zone), and I remember it would make you seriously nauseous, and it always had to be taken with food. If they give it to Corona patients, it must be done under doctor supervision, since such patients already have pre-existing conditions such as heart disease, so there could be accidental deaths from Chloriquine.
Chloroquine is very dangerous in overdose. It is rapidly absorbed from the gut. In 1961, a published compilation of case reports contained accounts of three children who took overdoses and died within 2.5 hours of taking the drug. While the amount of the overdose was not stated, the therapeutic index for chloroquine is known to be small. One of the children died after taking 0.75 or 1 gram, or twice a single therapeutic amount for children. Symptoms of overdose include headache, drowsiness, visual disturbances, nausea and vomiting, cardiovascular collapse, seizures, and sudden respiratory and cardiac arrest
Serious question - can you tell me where this idea that it's a dangerous drug came from?
It's been in use for several decades to treat a variety of conditions, from malaria to lupus. I don't follow mainstream news narratives, so if that's where it came from, that would make a lot of sense. I do genuinely want to know where everyone's getting this idea, though.
I recall hearing something about "two grams can kill a person" which is 10x the normal dosage - of course a person shouldn't take 10x the recommended/prescribed dosage, of anything. Other than that, I'm at a loss as to where people are getting this idea. I'm sure it's not as safe as Tylenol, fine, but your statement above indicates that you think it's far more dangerous than it's worth, to try it and see if it works for some people.
Looks like the typical dose is 1 g the first day and then 1/2 g on subsequent days. So that would be twice the loading dose that's fatal.
Many of the side effects are mild (nausea, headaches, itching, etc) but some are more concerning: convulsions, irregular heartbeat, difficulty breathing, hallucinations. Scientists need to make sure the cure isn't worse than the disease.
FDA just approved emergency use of hydroxychloroquine sulfate based on anecdotal evidence. That's... a little concerning. Hopefully it saves more people than it kills.
It's a gamble, like everything this POTUS does. He removed barriers to getting drugs approved (and barriers to keep companies from polluting). Some will see it as a good move, to reduce red-tape, others will see it as wreckless, and worry it may cost lives. Both opinions have some merit.
Personally, I'm for removing barriers, but it should be done with some educated guesses, not by a politician willing to risk someone else's life on a calculated bet to get reelected. But hey, if it works, he looks like a hero, if it doesn't, "they probably would have died anyway". Right? (Sarcasm)
^As much as I do think it was illadvised, I do believe there is SOME merit to carefully removing red-tape. I just also think this was not careful.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
