The Big Gamble: Hydroxychloroquine

[Doc]

13 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

Be careful when giving advice to Gene. He might very well take that advice just to spite you. 

 

No, he only listens to liberals and follows everything they say.

[Gene Frenkle]

1 hour ago, spartacus said:

it does for thousands of doctors and their patients using it treat the virus.

could be why the US health system is not being overrun with all of these new cases

 

for some reason, it just does not work in rigged in studies run by big pharma

 

Thousands of people swear by homeopathy.  Doesn't mean it works.

55 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Yup.  Like I said, follow the (big pharma) money.  Bet a lot of them have tons of shares of Gilead. 

 

Sure, ok...does it work yet?  Did adding zinc do the trick?  I'm looking forward to this ending the pandemic that already ended.

[Doc]

41 minutes ago, Gene Frenkle said:

Sure, ok...does it work yet?  Did adding zinc do the trick?  I'm looking forward to this ending the pandemic that already ended.

 

Broken record.  Broken record.  Broken record. 

 

Tell your puppet masters to change it.

[Gene Frenkle]

34 minutes ago, Doc said:

 

Broken record.  Broken record.  Broken record. 

 

Tell your puppet masters to change it.

 

No *****, dude. I've been hearing about this cure for months. Some evidence would be nice. Is it too much to ask that the miracle cure to have some data behind it?

[BillStime]

This thread is still open? LMAO

[Gene Frenkle]

The believers keep bumping it with stories about how the man is trying to keep it down.

[Doc]

2 hours ago, Gene Frenkle said:

The believers keep bumping it with stories about how the man is trying to keep it down.

 

LOL!  Who are the ones who keep posting links to stories about studies that quickly become discredited?

[keepthefaith]

2 hours ago, Gene Frenkle said:

 

No *****, dude. I've been hearing about this cure for months. Some evidence would be nice. Is it too much to ask that the miracle cure to have some data behind it?

 

Can't recall anyone in Trump Admin or through media calling it a cure.  The claims have been that it can somewhat reduce the severity and recovery time for some with the virus or have some preventative benefits.. 

[Gene Frenkle]

2 hours ago, Doc said:

 

LOL!  Who are the ones who keep posting links to stories about studies that quickly become discredited?

 

Look at every recent bump in this thread. I know you're not concerned with facts, but really...

[Warren Zevon]

[Foxx]

On 6/17/2020 at 2:45 PM, Koko78 said:

 

Take some of the fish tank cleaner and let us know.

https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1273363251049398274

 

[Doc]

On 6/17/2020 at 11:28 PM, Gene Frenkle said:

Look at every recent bump in this thread. I know you're not concerned with facts, but really...

 

Oh, the hypocrisy!

 

1 hour ago, Foxx said:

https://twitter.com/Techno_Fog/status/1273363251049398274

 

 

You know how I knew the original story was bogus?  Because they're Dems and they never do anything Trump says.

[Gene Frenkle]

HCQ No Longer Approved Even a Little for COVID-19

— Study after study showed no benefit, and now the FDA has had enough

 

A letter from the agency to the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) detailed the FDA's concerns, including that suggested dosing regimens are "unlikely to produce an antiviral effect," and said "decreased viral shedding" from treatment with these drugs, noted in some observational studies, "has not been consistently replicated."

 

While current FDA guidelines did not recommend use of the drugs outside of a randomized clinical trial, the FDA also pointed to recent data from a large clinical trial showing no "evidence of benefit" for mortality, effect on hospital length of stay, or need for mechanical ventilation among COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine.

The FDA originally granted an EUA to HCQ on March 28, 2020.

 

This may be the end for the controversial drug as COVID-19 therapy; study after study found no benefit in the drug among hospitalized patients or as post-exposure prophylaxis. It will remain available for its previously approved conditions, which include rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus as well as malaria, and can still be prescribed off-label at physicians' discretion. Without the EUA, however, third-party reimbursement may become harder to secure for COVID-19 cases, and malpractice litigation easier to win if patients suffer adverse events. Also, access to HCQ and CQ in the National Strategic Stockpile for use in COVID-19 patients will now end.

 

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87066

[Reality Check]

24 minutes ago, Gene Frenkle said:

HCQ No Longer Approved Even a Little for COVID-19

— Study after study showed no benefit, and now the FDA has had enough

 

A letter from the agency to the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority (BARDA) detailed the FDA's concerns, including that suggested dosing regimens are "unlikely to produce an antiviral effect," and said "decreased viral shedding" from treatment with these drugs, noted in some observational studies, "has not been consistently replicated."

 

While current FDA guidelines did not recommend use of the drugs outside of a randomized clinical trial, the FDA also pointed to recent data from a large clinical trial showing no "evidence of benefit" for mortality, effect on hospital length of stay, or need for mechanical ventilation among COVID-19 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine.

The FDA originally granted an EUA to HCQ on March 28, 2020.

 

This may be the end for the controversial drug as COVID-19 therapy; study after study found no benefit in the drug among hospitalized patients or as post-exposure prophylaxis. It will remain available for its previously approved conditions, which include rheumatoid arthritis and systemic lupus erythematosus as well as malaria, and can still be prescribed off-label at physicians' discretion. Without the EUA, however, third-party reimbursement may become harder to secure for COVID-19 cases, and malpractice litigation easier to win if patients suffer adverse events. Also, access to HCQ and CQ in the National Strategic Stockpile for use in COVID-19 patients will now end.

 

https://www.medpagetoday.com/infectiousdisease/covid19/87066

 

 

That is great news.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-8470505/Gilead-prices-coronavirus-drug-2-340-rich-countries.html

 

Remdesivir will work just fine

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8471281/Covid-19-treatment-hopes-dashed-trial-promising-HIV-drug-reveals-does-NOT-work.html

 

Kaletra will also work for you.

 

Good luck.

[Gene Frenkle]

Just now, Reality Check said:

 

 

That is great news.

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-8470505/Gilead-prices-coronavirus-drug-2-340-rich-countries.html

 

Remdesivir will work just fine

 

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8471281/Covid-19-treatment-hopes-dashed-trial-promising-HIV-drug-reveals-does-NOT-work.html

 

Kaletra will also work for you.

 

Good luck.

 

This is the HCQ thread.  You can start another for Remdesivir, which doesn't work very well either.

[Reality Check]

1 minute ago, Gene Frenkle said:

 

This is the HCQ thread.  You can start another for Remdesivir, which doesn't work very well either.

 

 

How do you know?

[Gene Frenkle]

15 minutes ago, Reality Check said:

 

 

How do you know?

 

Cause science?  I mean Remdesivir seems to shorten hospital stays, maybe.  Not exactly a silver bullet.

 

HCQ seems to just make things worse, which is why it's being abandoned.

[Reality Check]

1 minute ago, Gene Frenkle said:

 

Cause science?  I mean Remdesivir seems to shorten hospital stays, maybe.  Not exactly a silver bullet.

 

HCQ seems to just make things worse, which is why it's being abandoned.

 

 

Have you actually read any of the scientific studies from these researchers, or do you just take abbreviated stories at face value taking solace in the fact that "scientists" were involved?

 

Why is the sky blue?

 

science

[Gene Frenkle]

9 minutes ago, Reality Check said:

 

 

Have you actually read any of the scientific studies from these researchers, or do you just take abbreviated stories at face value taking solace in the fact that "scientists" were involved?

 

Why is the sky blue?

 

science

 

You can get a good look at a t-bone by sticking your head up a bull's ass, but I'd rather take the butcher's word for it.

 

Are you saying I'm wrong.  Does HCQ finally work now?

[Reality Check]

3 minutes ago, Gene Frenkle said:

 

You can get a good look at a t-bone by sticking your head up a bull's ass, but I'd rather take the butcher's word for it.

 

Are you saying I'm wrong.  Does HCQ finally work now?

 

 

Yes it does work.

 

I don't have to stick my head up a bull's ass, when I know physicians in the military that gave me advice on it and have successfully treated it with HCQ and Zinc. Zero fatalities..

 

I take their advice over the FDA any day.

 

You can blindly follow the FDA's recommendation all you want, that is absolutely your right to choose what you think is best for you.

 

I and others will do the same.

 

I wonder the Chinese are doing to treat it.

 

Being such a trusted friend, I am sure that they will continue to help us with the "pandemic" they exported to the world.

[Gene Frenkle]

7 minutes ago, Reality Check said:

 

 

Yes it does work.

 

I don't have to stick my head up a bull's ass, when I know physicians in the military that gave me advice on it and have successfully treated it with HCQ and Zinc. Zero fatalities..

 

I take their advice over the FDA any day.

 

You can blindly follow the FDA's recommendation all you want, that is absolutely your right to choose what you think is best for you.

 

I and others will do the same.

 

I wonder the Chinese are doing to treat it.

 

Being such a trusted friend, I am sure that they will continue to help us with the "pandemic" they exported to the world.

 

Hahahahahahaaaa.  I believe the word is: triggered.

 

So it DOES work now, huh?  Link?

[Reality Check]

3 minutes ago, Gene Frenkle said:

 

Hahahahahahaaaa.  I believe the word is: triggered.

 

So it DOES work now, huh?  Link?

 

 

Triggered?

 

I just calmly explained my position to you...

 

...without an attitude or insults.

 

Do what ever you like.

[Gene Frenkle]

2 minutes ago, Reality Check said:

 

 

Triggered?

 

I just calmly explained my position to you...

 

...without an attitude or insults.

 

Do what ever you like.

 

You didn't explain anything.  It's a losing fight anyway because HCQ doesn't work at all.

[billsfan1959]

4 minutes ago, Winston Zeddemore said:

https://eu.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/07/02/michigan-henry-ford-health-study-finds-hydroxychloroquine-lowers-covid-19-death-rate/5365090002/

 

Shhhhh.....and make sure you don't post this in any COVID threads in OTW...

[Magox]

6 minutes ago, Winston Zeddemore said:

https://eu.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/07/02/michigan-henry-ford-health-study-finds-hydroxychloroquine-lowers-covid-19-death-rate/5365090002/

 

 

Quote

 

Henry Ford Health System officials report a study done by the health system shows the controversial anti-malaria drug hydroxychloroquine helps lower the death rate of COVID-19 patients.

Heads of the Michigan health system said Thursday the study found the drug “significantly” decreased the death rate of patients.

The study analyzed 2,541 patients hospitalized among the system’s six hospitals between March 10 and May 2 and found 13% of those treated with hydroxychloroquine died while 26% of those who did not receive the drug died.

 

Quote

 

The study, published in the International Society of Infectious Disease, found patients did not suffer heart-related side effects from the drug. 

 

 

 

This is also noteworthy

 

Quote

 

“We attribute our findings that differ from other studies to early treatment, and part of a combination of interventions that were done in supportive care of patients, including careful cardiac monitoring," said Zervos, division head of infectious disease for the health system. Zervos authored the study with epidemiologist Dr. Samia Arshad. 

Other studies, Zervos noted, included different populations or were not peer-reviewed.

“Our dosing also differed from other studies not showing a benefit of the drug,” he said. 

 

 

 

 

Two main distinctions between this and the other studies.  The criticisms of the other studies was that the dose was wrong.  This study used a different dosage from previous studies.

 

And the other distinction was that this was used in "early treatment".  Which is the other point that many had made that HCQ was better for early treatment not once they were severely ill.

 

 

[SectionC3]

23 minutes ago, Winston Zeddemore said:

https://eu.detroitnews.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/07/02/michigan-henry-ford-health-study-finds-hydroxychloroquine-lowers-covid-19-death-rate/5365090002/

Good news.  I just threw my mask in the trash.  Gotta be like the Don.  It’s probably just illegal immigrants who are getting the virus in the south, anyways. 
 

update:  mask has been burned.  No need for it. We have this under control.  It’s going to magically go away.  

Edited July 2, 2020 by SectionC3

[GG]

17 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Good news.  I just threw my mask in the trash.  Gotta be like the Don.  It’s probably just illegal immigrants who are getting the virus in the south, anyways. 
 

update:  mask has been burned.  No need for it. We have this under control.  It’s going to magically go away.  

 

Keep proving that you're a grade A #######

[WEATHER DOT COM]

19 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

Good news.  I just threw my mask in the trash.  Gotta be like the Don.  It’s probably just illegal immigrants who are getting the virus in the south, anyways. 
 

update:  mask has been burned.  No need for it. We have this under control.  It’s going to magically go away.  

 

Masks don't work kind of like your sarcasm doesn't work.

[SectionC3]

27 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Keep proving that you're a grade A #######

 

What, you don’t believe it’s going to magically go away?  You’re the intellectual standard bearer of these parts, so I’ll follow your guidance on matters such as the question whether it’s a good idea to wear a mask during a pandemic of respiratory illness.  I know the Don thinks it’s unnecessary, but I’m curious what you have to say on the issue.  

28 minutes ago, wAcKy ZeBrA said:

 

Masks don't work kind of like your sarcasm doesn't work.

 

Hong Kong disagrees. 

[GG]

13 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

What, you don’t believe it’s going to magically go away?  You’re the intellectual standard bearer of these parts, so I’ll follow your guidance on matters such as the question whether it’s a good idea to wear a mask during a pandemic of respiratory illness.  I know the Don thinks it’s unnecessary, but I’m curious what you have to say on the issue.  

 

 

No, I think it's a sign of an extra potent douche to ***** on an article that described positive developments in battling a deadly virus.  

[Nanker]

https://eraoflight.com/2020/04/11/french-study-of-1000-patients-see-98-success-rate-with-hydroxychloroquine-azithromycin-regimen/

 

 

[SectionC3]

2 hours ago, GG said:

 

No, I think it's a sign of an extra potent douche to ***** on an article that described positive developments in battling a deadly virus.  

You know what would be much, much more positive?  Not chasing a maybe marginally-effective wonder drug and instead wearing our masks! 
 

***

 

But of course the occupant of the oval can’t be bothered with that.   It’s only the silver bullet for this thing.  It’s just not manly enough for him.  Instead we’ll worry about the marginal effectiveness of HCQ.  Spend our time wringing our hands about the 4% of sick exceptionally sick people we can help instead of encouraging them to endure in the very minor inconvenience that odds overwhelmingly say would have prevented them from becoming sick in the first place.  

Edited July 2, 2020 by SectionC3

[Doc]

2 hours ago, GG said:

No, I think it's a sign of an extra potent douche to ***** on an article that described positive developments in battling a deadly virus.  

 

Like I said, they'd rather see people die than Trump get a victory here.  It's pathetic, but that's what the left has been reduced to.

[GG]

10 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

You know what would be much, much more positive?  Not chasing a maybe marginally-effective wonder drug and instead wearing our masks! 
 

***

 

But of course the occupant of the oval can’t be bothered with that.   It’s only the silver bullet for this thing.  It’s just not manly enough for him.  Instead we’ll worry about the marginal effectiveness of HCQ.  Spend our time wringing our hands about the 4% of sick exceptionally sick people we can help instead of encouraging them to endure in the very minor inconvenience that odds overwhelmingly say would have prevented them from becoming sick in the first place.  

 

Or you can acknowledge the difference between prevention & cure/treatment.

 

BTW, who was the erstwhile healthcare advisor who didn't recommend wearing masks when they would have been most effective?

 

BTW, I love Fauci because as a scientist, he occasionally slips into truth mode and revealed the real reason he didn't recommend mask wearing in February.  But hey, it only cost a few thousand lives in NYS, and if the NY governor doesn't care about them, why would Fauci?

[SectionC3]

29 minutes ago, GG said:

 

Or you can acknowledge the difference between prevention & cure/treatment.

 

BTW, who was the erstwhile healthcare advisor who didn't recommend wearing masks when they would have been most effective?

 

BTW, I love Fauci because as a scientist, he occasionally slips into truth mode and revealed the real reason he didn't recommend mask wearing in February.  But hey, it only cost a few thousand lives in NYS, and if the NY governor doesn't care about them, why would Fauci?

 

I appreciate the difference.  As the intellectual standard bearer of the alt wrong community, however, I'm sure that you can appreciate that focusing on a highly effective preventative measure of minimal cost, minimal intrusion, and maximum efficacy would be a much better approach than pursuing a post hoc rationalization for misplaced faith in a marginally effective treatment for a marginal number of infected persons.  

 

 

[GG]

19 minutes ago, SectionC3 said:

 

I appreciate the difference.  As the intellectual standard bearer of the alt wrong community, however, I'm sure that you can appreciate that focusing on a highly effective preventative measure of minimal cost, minimal intrusion, and maximum efficacy would be a much better approach than pursuing a post hoc rationalization for misplaced faith in a marginally effective treatment for a marginal number of infected persons.  

 

 

Good, then please follow up with Fauci on why he insisted in February that masks weren't effective when that would have made a huge difference in case growth.  

[BillStime]

52 minutes ago, GG said:

Good, then please follow up with Fauci on why he insisted in February that masks weren't effective when that would have made a huge difference in case growth.  

Fauci said the reason the public was advised not to wear masks at the beginning of the pandemic was that there were too few to go around. Apparently there wasn’t enough for medical professionals on the front lines.

 

It’s really too bad Trump dismantled our pandemic infrastructure and made it even worse by ignoring his intelligence.

 

 

 

Edited July 2, 2020 by BillStime

[GG]

11 minutes ago, BillStime said:

Fauci said the reason the public was advised not to wear masks at the beginning of the pandemic was that there were too few to go around. Apparently there wasn’t enough for medical professionals on the front lines.

 

It’s really too bad Trump dismantled our pandemic infrastructure and made it even worse by ignoring his intelligence.

 

 

 

So essentially, you're applauding a technocrat's cold-hearted calculation to preserve mask capacity, even though he knew the masks are effective in slowing down the spread and that would have been most impactful in February. 

 

But let's post a few more memes to deflect from the decisions and advice given in February.  

 

Hey everyone, go see a movie!

[Warcodered]

13 minutes ago, GG said:

So essentially, you're applauding a technocrat's cold-hearted calculation to preserve mask capacity, even though he knew the masks are effective in slowing down the spread and that would have been most impactful in February. 

 

But let's post a few more memes to deflect from the decisions and advice given in February.  

 

Hey everyone, go see a movie!

alternatively it could of caused an even greater shortage of masks having even worse effect on the medical professionals we need during this pandemic. In the end maybe he was right maybe he was wrong but he made a choice with the information he had and when that information indicated he should change that policy he did. What difficult choice have you made in the last 6 months?

[SectionC3]

2 hours ago, GG said:

Good, then please follow up with Fauci on why he insisted in February that masks weren't effective when that would have made a huge difference in case growth.  

The other two guys defeated the intellectual standard bearer of the alt wrong here.  But I’ll add that two wrongs don’t make a right.  So even if Fauci erred,  that mistake is no excuse for Trump’s continued recalcitrance on the mask issue.