>0 evidence that hydroxychloroquine cures or effectively treats covid-19
Incorrect and a blatant lie created by US partisan politics, identified as effective in vitro against coronavirus as far back as 2005 in jounal of virology and ample eveident from several trials on infected that it is substantially effective in reducing mortality and adiing recovery >those given hydroxychloroquine in trials were more likely to die than those who received standard care Another outright lie. However given the nature of US politics and the literal insanity of the US Presidents political opponents its not surprising to see them spreading unscientific debased information, even if it undermines a treatment to save lives to try and score political points.
If you were even remotely interested OP you would find the peer reviewed studies. You are not. My preference is actually chloroquinine phosphate or GI ammonium chloride. However hydroxychloroquine is in a comparabible bracket to these and has less supply and approval concerns. However you OP should ignore all these treatments and simply KYS as you are willing to kill thousands of vulnerable and sick people by denying them a valid treatment purely for the purpose of political spin because 'orange man bad'
Cooper Evans
This is the study with selection bias, it wasn’t double blind placebo. They gave hydroxy to the patients who were more severely symptomatic...therefore most likely to die.
Liam Peterson
I agree , but administration has restricted it's use to infectious disease only and we only have one infectious disease practitioner who isn't going to use it. Doubt the general public knows what right to try is or if they would have the fortitude to argue with an "expert" about it even if their family member is dying
Ryan Diaz
trust the plan guys!
Mason Watson
I do and will. Already had convo with wife. Fuck liberal faggots Fuck globohomos Fuck jannies.
>My hospital has banned the use of hydroxychloroquine for covid because of this study
If true then it would be little better than politicised murder the only study that has cast chloroquine's in a negative light was one funded by china in brazil which administered a deliberately lethal known dosage. My assumption was that was in order to delay adoption in the USA and to magnify the impact of the virus there. Indeed the actors in the US political system who were most involved in Chinese trade and profiting from it have been the ones postulating incorrectly and unscientifically that chloroquinines do not work, absolutely contrary to the published studies prior to this becoming a US politicised issue....
Liam Powell
In the current period, it seems that passion dominates rigorous and balanced scientific analysis and may lead to scientific misconduct. The article by Magagnoli et al. (Magagnoli, 2020) is an absolutely spectacular example of this. Indeed, in this work, it is concluded, in the end, that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) would double the mortality in patients with COVID with a fatality rate of 28% (versus 11% in the NoHCQ group), which is extraordinarily hard to believe. The analysis of the data shows two major biases, which show a welling to be convinced before starting the work : The first is that lymphopenia is twice as common in the HCQ groups (25% in the HCQ, 31% in the HCQ+AZ group versus 14% in the no HCQ group, p =.02) and there is an absolute correlation between lymphopenia (
Julian Evans
The second major bias is that in an attempt to provide meaningful data, by eliminating the initial severity at the time of treatment, two tables are shown: one table where drugs are prescribed before intubation, and which shows no significant difference in the 3 different groups (9/90 (10%) in the HCQ group, 11/101 (10. 9%) HCQ+AZ, and 15/177 (8.5%) in the group without HCQ, chi-square = 0.47, ddl = 2, p = 0.79), and one table, where it is not clear when the drugs were prescribed, where there are significant differences. These differences are most likely related to the fact that the patients had been intubated for some before receiving hydroxychloroquine in desperation. It is notable that this is unreasonable at the time of the cytokine storm, as it is unlikely that hydrochloroquine alone would be able to control patients at this stage of the disease. Moreover, incomprehensibly, the “untreated” group actually received azithromycin in 30% of cases, without this group being analyzed in any distinct way. Azithromycin is also a proposed treatment for COVID (Gautret, 2020) with in vitro efficacy (Andreani, 2020), and to mix it with patients who are supposedly untreated is something that is closer to scientific fraud than reasonable analysis. Altogether these 3 voluntary biases are all pushing to the idea of dangerosity of hydroxychloroquine safest drug as reported on nearly 1 million people (Lane, 2020). All in all, this is a work that shows that, in this period, it is possible to propose things that do not stand up to any methodological analysis to try to demonstrate that one is right.
I have been studying the effects of chloroquine's and ammonium chlorides on coronaviruses for over a decade - since 2007, not every day but certainly probably spend 30 days a year for over a decade. That they work is not scientifically debatable and that is being formulated as a subject of doubt in the US political context makes me very suspicious that those doubts are being created by strategic enemies of the USA and its population. Chloroquinine phosphate for example is not a particularly dangerous drug (it was widely administered to hundreds of millions of children in Africa and India for decades as a malarial preventative). Like any drug you can overdose. You can do that with paracetamol to
