World wide survey of 6000 doctors...Hydroxychloroquine rated 'most effective therapy' (layman, bias)
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.
Hydroxychloroquine rated 'most effective therapy' by doctors for coronavirus: Global survey
"An international poll of more than 6,000 doctors released Thursday found that the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine was the most highly rated treatment for the novel coronavirus.
The survey conducted by Sermo, a global health care polling company, of 6,227 physicians in 30 countries found that 37% of those treating COVID-19 patients rated hydroxychloroquine as the “most effective therapy” from a list of 15 options.
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration gave chloroquine and its next-generation derivative, hydroxychloroquine, emergency-use authorization Monday for treating the novel coronavirus, although the drug was already being used off-label by some doctors and hospitals for COVID-19 patients.
Azithromycin, known by the brand name Zithromax or Z-Pak, was rated the second-most effective therapy at 32%
Hydroxychloroquine, which is sold under the brand name Plaquenil, was prescribed mainly in the United States for the most severe cases, but not so in other countries."
China threw everything and the kitchen sink at the virus. It concluded it may reduce symptoms and reduce hospital stays.
Seems a cocktail of chloroquine and Zpak have been reasonably effective as China reported. Trials will determine effectiveness over a broad spectrum of patients at different stages, ages and underlying health issues. Who knows? Maybe even gender and blood type matters.
Israel is the largest global supplier of generic chloroquine.
One thing that we can ascertain from your “real science” source, is that from the 2 Chinese studies, the author gave “cautious approval”, of which I agree. Also interesting that the study that showed no effect gave once a day dosing vs the one that showed positive effects which gave twice a day dosing. Hydroxychloroquine only. No Azithromycin.
And of the 3rd study in the second link, it is too difficult to make any conclusions because of the faults of the study.
What I would say about all 3 of the studies, is that they are all too small of a sample size to make any concrete statements either way. The large scale studies being done now will be a lot more informative.
As I said, there is enough anecdotal evidence, worldwide, to be optimistic. And to treat people with the Hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin combination until the large scale studies are finished.
Also, I will add, based on the anectodal results, we are giving a higher azithromycin dose than they gave in the French study.
I only read one of the Chinese studies.....the one that said "it didn't do any better"
When I got to the part where they said they added to the protocol they were already using....rather than testing it alone....I folded and blew it off
...didn't read the other one because of that....and the Chinese are full of crap
Why are Republicans trying to push this unproven treatment?
To save face for their homeboy Trump. Really it shouldn't even be political. This is called the dumbing down of America.
It shouldn’t be political. Something you might want to remember too. Hopefully we are ALL rooting for this drug to work.
I am very optimistic, and will be a proponent of it’s use in the meantime, though I wont make any concrete claims until the large scale studies are done.
One thing that we can ascertain from your “real science” source, is that from the 2 Chinese studies, the author gave “cautious approval”, of which I agree. Also interesting that the study that showed no effect gave once a day dosing vs the one that showed positive effects which gave twice a day dosing. Hydroxychloroquine only. No Azithromycin.
And of the 3rd study in the second link, it is too difficult to make any conclusions because of the faults of the study.
What I would say about all 3 of the studies, is that they are all too small of a sample size to make any concrete statements either way. The large scale studies being done now will be a lot more informative.
As I said, there is enough anecdotal evidence, worldwide, to be optimistic. And to treat people with the Hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin combination until the large scale studies are finished.
Also, I will add, based on the anectodal results, we are giving a higher azithromycin dose than they gave in the French study.
AnethesiaMD--since you may have access to more info on these drugs: any literature on possible down sides to these two drugs alone or together. I've taken Azithromycin before, generally having it give me quite severe stomach pain, but not the other. Of course, if I was dying I wouldn't care, but are there any risks to giving it to someone with the virus who can recover without them? I *thought* I had heard that in some cases the malaria drug could be problematic.
China threw everything and the kitchen sink at the virus. It concluded it may reduce symptoms and reduce hospital stays.
Seems a cocktail of chloroquine and Zpak have been reasonably effective as China reported. Trials will determine effectiveness over a broad spectrum of patients at different stages, ages and underlying health issues. Who knows? Maybe even gender and blood type matters.
Israel is the largest global supplier of generic chloroquine.
Mom, go back and read that Chinese study again...did you even read the actual study...or just what the ignorant agenda driven media said?
The study says they added it to the protocol they were already using...they did not test it alone
..and their conclusion was that it didn't "work any better" than the protocol they were already using
Do you see the major flaw in that?
The second major flaw is China is pushing the anti-virals they make, sell, and make money on
I only read one of the Chinese studies.....the one that said "it didn't do any better"
When I got to the part where they said they added to the protocol they were already using....rather than testing it alone....I folded and blew it off
...didn't read the other one because of that....and the Chinese are full of crap
The other study, with a twice a day dosing, showed improvement in the lung CT scans of people who got the drug, compared to the control group.
The problem with all of the studies so far, is that they have not been comparing by different age groups. You would expect younger people to do better with or without the drug. Because the studies are so small as it is, it is not possible to break them down into age groups because then you would only be comparing like 5 or 10 people in each age group. Which is even smaller than the small study in it’s entirety.
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.
