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.
...The randomized placebo-controlled trial, which rapidly launched on March 22, tested if hydroxychloroquine could decrease severity of COVID-19 symptoms and prevent hospitalization. The trial enrolled 491 non-hospitalized adults from across 40 U.S. states and three Canadian provinces. Participants were enrolled in the first four days of symptoms with 56% enrolled within one day of symptom onset...
...The trial results, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine, determined that hydroxychloroquine did not decrease the severity of COVID-19 symptoms over 14 days any better than a placebo...
for the bajillionth time – this can’t be a new thought for most of you…
This never ending stream of posts showing that some folks benefit is meaningless. It would not matter if you conclusively proved 100% of people treated with it got better 1 day sooner.
It would still NOT prove they wouldn’t have gotten better anyway, and it would still NOT outweigh the ONE GUY who died from it, even if it’s one of millions. It happens. It’s not zero.
For Malaria – it’s easy. Lots of people die from Malaria without treatment. For COVID – eh, you’re already probably going to recover just fine. It’s harder to show the benefit outweighs the (rare but not zero) side effects.
Dr. Risch is a great expert on lots of things – but he contradicted himself in this particular article (from the OP’s link).
He declares it beneficial …”Very early in the course of illness…”
But then states: “I myself know of two doctors who have saved the lives of hundreds of patients with these medications”
How could you know you saved their lives if it was very early in the course of the illness?
There is no way to know.
It is a bit of a philosophical issue. Dr. Risch surely knows the side effects and the odds – but he (personally) believes it’s worth it. Many folks do. The FDA does not.
So Trump's appointee head of the FDA says don't use HCQ, the doctors won't prescribe it and it's the evil democrats fault? Well maybe in orange koolaid land or paid troll thread after ridiculous thread.
This is simply another example of liberal hypocrisy. They freak out over hydroxychloroquine because there are some dissenting opinions on its effectiveness. So what do the liberals do? They try to forbid it, of course... for the good of the people. You see, it is not proven effective, since there are dissenting opinions.
Now, take that argument to the issue of wearing a mask. Although the science of the matter seems to have suddenly changed right around April or May of this year, if you look at medical and scientific studies on the web (if there are any left that have not been scrubbed), you see a whole bunch of them claiming that masks are ineffective barriers to virus. There are also studies which claim that long-term and constant wearing of masks cause a number of health issues. Thus, there are plenty of dissenting opinions on the issue of wearing masks. Yet... do the liberals freak out over that? Of course not. They don't care about dissenting opinions in this case. In fact they go out of their way to either cover them up or ridicule them.
So in one case, the left is all in, and in the other case, the left is all out. Why? It's obvious hypocrisy, but WHY do they react so totally differently in these similar circumstances?
I'll tell you why: because in one case, there is really nothing much in it for them. In the other, there is. In the case of wearing masks, it's a behavioral modification than they can force upon the masses. And that is what gets the typical modern liberal off--control over others. If they can control your behavior, thoughts, finances, desires, etc, they are orgasmic to the point of needing to wear Depends. It's all about control over others.
I don't know why conservative keep promoting a drug for a pandemic that they believe is fake.
I don't think that anyone believes it is fake. But what many believe is that the handling of the pandemic is not only ludicrous and nonsensical, but damned opportunistic as well.
on Aug. 4, members of the Yale scientific and medical community voiced concern over Risch’s ardent advocacy of hydroxychloroquine. It is signed by more than 20 Yale faculty members.
“As his colleagues, we defend the right of Dr. Risch, a respected cancer epidemiologist, to voice his opinions,” the letter states. “But he is not an expert in infectious disease epidemiology and he has not been swayed by the body of scientific evidence from rigorously conducted clinical trials, which refute the plausibility of his belief and arguments.”
Although they go unacknowledged in Risch’s paper and Newsweek piece, there have been a number of randomized control trials conducted to evaluate the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine (alone and with drugs like azithromycin), which have not found promising results (Cavalcanti et al. 2020, Maisonnasse et al. 2020, Mitja et al. 2020, Tang et al. 2020).
I don't think that anyone believes it is fake. But what many believe is that the handling of the pandemic is not only ludicrous and nonsensical, but damned opportunistic as well.
There's a LOT of "no worse than the flu" claims.
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.
