Hydroxychloroquine

Ubiq,
It was unsafe in the high doses and safer at the lower doses and in BOTH the groups, but they were also giving two cardiotoxic antibiotics, and they did not eliminate patients for having prior cardiac problems (for the purpose of the study).
They could lower the does even further, they do not have to stick to the recommendations.

In that Brazilian study “81 patients….. were hospitalized with severe respiratory syndrome”.
That is not what the Jewish doctor did. He treated his patients before they reached such a state, from what I understand.

From the article,
“Overall, at least two patients in the high-dose group developed ventricular tachycardia, a type of arrhythmia that can lead to sudden cardiac death and none in the low-dose group developed the condition, according to the pre-print study’s data.”

In the low dose group no one died from the toxic effect of the drugs.

Most of the patients died from Coronvirus un-intercepted by heart attack, if that is the right way to put it, not from any adverse reaction to the HCQ.

Significantly the zinc was not mentioned. It is the final bomb against the virus.
6 out of 40 deaths is 15% death rate in the lower HCQ group, but where is the zinc?!

The zinc is there to fight the virus and to not let the patient succumb to the virus rather than making a high dose safer.

Please see a youtube video entitled: “LA doctor seeing success with hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19“”, wherein Dr. Anthony Cardillo says very sick from coronavirus patients need only 8- 12 hours treatment with HOQ AND ZINC to get completely well!
He also says prescribing doctors must use caution with heart patients.
He says HOQ alone, without ZINC does nothing for the c-virus.

PS in the Brazillian study, there was no zinc, and HOQ was not used, they used Chloroquine which is more toxic than HOQ, with the cardiotoxic antibiotics.

Ubiq:

I repeat, “PS, in the Brazillian study, there was no zinc, and HOQ was not used, they used Chloroquine which is more toxic than HOQ, with the cardiotoxic antibiotics.”

So it means as I have said before, that zinc is an essential component with using HCQ, and precautions must be taken against using high doses of the drug for an extended time (The Dr here in the latest video I have cited sees a cure in 8-12 hours) and chloroquine is much more toxic than HCQ, so HCQ should be used instead.

So if more people would be more informed ……. That is the point. Okay?

“So if more people would be more informed ……. That is the point. Okay?”

sure but why are you addressing it to me?

“The Dr here in the latest video I have cited sees a cure in 8-12 hours”

Lol you do realize he says “we should really reserve it for people who are really sick” (at the 50 second mark) So thank you for finding yet ANOTHER doctor who disagrees with Dr. Z (the subject at hand)

I’m still not clear on what your point is.
for the10th ? 20th? time I never said not to take, it nor that it doesnt help with or without zinc. That isnt the subject of this thread

ready

Hold up you lost me
Lets rewind

This thread started with the OP asking “Dr Zelenko is having success wit hHCQ why isnt everyone using it?” (not a verbatim quote)

I replied that His data wasnt necessarily convincing nor applicable to all patients , and given that HCQ t oall is not without its downsides Not everyone is ready to follow him

With me so far?
Then you joined in with a bunch of comments not necessarily realtyed to the subject at hand. Yet for soem reason addressed to me
you introduced a study highlighting the risk of HCQ (as I said)
You cited a Doctor advising AGAINST giving HCQ to thhose not sick (agaisnt Dr. Zelenko)

“The zinc is apparently essential, and you have also more or less side stepped that issue”
i’m not sure what you mean I havent side stepped anything. so give zinc gezunterheit

“and patients should be carefully watched for heart problems, as well as screened beforehand.”
Is Dr. Zelenko doing that

As an aside, my hospital stopped giving Azithromycin along with the HCQ and zinc given the high number of QT prolongations occurring

“So if more people would be more informed they would not be so against it.”
hopefully noone in a position to prescribe it is going to do so, or not do so, based on a post on ywn

And again, as Ive said from the onset Im not “against it” let alone “so against it” I’m just poitning out to the lack of data.
You have done zero to chane that other than provide a studtyy highlighting the RISK of HCQ and a doctor advocating AGAINST giving it to the walking well

“Wang et al reported that chloroquine effectively inhibits SARS-CoV-2 in vitro.”

Lots of drugs work in vitro and are either useless or even dangerous when given to humans.

” someone else reading your comments may think that there is not proven -even anecdotally- that it works. Which is not true, because Hydroxychloroquine has been shown to help prevent at risk patients from ending up in the hospital.”

No, it has NOT been proven that it works at all. And it is known to have serious potential for harm. Until the larger clinical trials are completed we do not have evidence that it is efficacious. (And most of the smaller studies that have reported findings so far do not show cause for optimism.

ubiq:

You Ubiq said that your hospital is not medicating coronavirus patients.
Please confirm what your hospital is doing for these patients
Those Dr Zelenko treated were technically all sick, he was being abundantly cautious as he does not use a crystal ball, baruch Hashem!.

“and patients should be carefully watched for heart problems, as well as screened beforehand.”
Is Dr. Zelenko doing that
Why wouldn’t he be doing that, he is a Dr with a brain.

Yes, there are risks but as with all side effects and contraindications. they must be assessed or each patient.

You are yet again avoiding the zinc!

Dr Zelenco had at the time several hundred patients on his “quick, fast” regimen, and no deaths.
Better than the alternative.

Ubiq wrote “As an aside, my hospital stopped giving Azithromycin along with the HCQ and zinc given the high number of QT prolongations occurring”

So please what are they giving? HCQ without antibiotics but with zinc? are these your own Hospital trials you referred to earlier?

Why don’t you contact Dr. Zelenco as to how he is monitoring adverse effects?
Yes, until the quote of yours that I rehashed above in this post, you have ignored zinc.

8-12 hours from Dr. Anthony Cardillo or a few days (perhaps a couple of days, I cannot recall except it was “fast” as well, for recovery from Dr Zelenco, that is great, they may not need an EKK if the patient is recovered and perhaps already off the regimen.

Oh wow how long this thread became!

As I mentioned earlier, even Dr. Zelenko does not make any claims aside from his anecdotal observations, he also agrees that this is not the standard of how medicine is practiced, but it is his opinion that the deviation is appropriate due to this being a pandemic.

But it is important to that Dr. Zelenko is dealing with a different group of people than that of the hospitals (who some of them did run studies on Hydroxy for Covid19 patients).

Dr. Zelenko is dealing with stable patients that do not (yet) require hospitalization, they are not suffering from respiratory failure, extreme hypoxia, hypercoagulation, sepsis and organ failure, or cytokine storm.

In fact, he claims that his treatment regiment is prevented his patients from becoming so sick so they have all these other complications that come along with the advanced stages of the disease.

The hospitals are dealing with patients that are already more advanced with the disease to the point that they require hospitalization.

This is why it makes it difficult to compare the success rate as there are different objectives for each group.

Also, not only is Dr. Zelenko still working on figuring this out and gathering anecdotal data, I am sure he understands that taking these medications have side effects, some benign that only cause people to be uncomfortable and others that are more severe such as changes in the electrical conduction of the heart that makes the patient vulnerable to deadly dysrhythmias.

Like everything in life, especially with medicine Risk vs Benefit has to be taken into consideration.

My point is, while this might or might not be as effective as the claims are, it for sure is not a simple straightforward treatment regiment for any group of patients.

How many days from when someone 65 or older first has symptoms till they end up in the ICU?

How many of them are feeling ill enough to bother calling their primary care doctor first before ending up in the ER?

How many people with mild cases call their primary care doctors before they need to go to the ER and then in the next few days progress to going to the ER?

There are just so many questions here that Zelenko does not address and why without a proper study his results are hard to make heads or tails out of.

If lack of oxygen occurs sometime between the 5th-8th day from first symptoms and that is when most go to the ER, it raises a very significant question, by what day of symptoms do people typically consult a doctor. I suspect that the first few days people don’t worry and then when it progresses or remains about a week they finally call their doctor (in numerous of Zelenko’s cases where they details the case history there have been symptoms for 4+ days as reported by the patient). But if that is the case, then by the time people call their doctor, if they are not being told to get to the ER, they are most likely not in the cohort that will ever go to the ER.

Further, when you look at actual cases Dr. Zelenko put out, there is a significant question as to what percent of his cases are not actually COVID-19. Recall he is treating almost anyone over 60 with symptoms of a cold, it is only those under 60 that have to present more serious symptoms to be treated.

Basically, if he treated about 400 patients with his treatment (while he had over a 1,000 patients, he only treated the ones over 60 or those younger with stronger signs of COVID-19, which was closer to 400), and 50% of them actually don’t have COVID-19 (whatever data he had from KJ does not necessarily extrapolate to the general population, hence his conclusions that people likely have COVID-19 are questionable), that means he only treated 200 patients with COVID-19. If the majority of the cases that result in death already went to the ER before they call him, then perhaps it is equivalent to treating 50 or so older patients. If 5% of these patients are expected to die, well that brings us to 2-3 deaths. Well I think he said 2 patients died…

Play with the numbers however you like (I acknowledge my numbers are likely off, but without better data, kind of hard to know exactly how), but without an proper study here, it does not take much to argue his results are anecdotal.

Any family doctors here, who get calls from patients over 60 with COVID-19 symptoms (not just confirmed tests) before you have to recommend they go to the ER? What percent of those patients eventually go on to being intubated or dying? That would perhaps help make some sense out of Zelenko’s data. Not saying that is enough by itself, but maybe it can tell us if his numbers are within what we would expect or they are truly off-the-chart and worthy of consideration.

Look, I want his treatment to work and if someone was sick with this would be open to trying this treatment, however the science matters. If this does not actually work, then we need to focus on other solutions. If it does work then we can reopen the country. You can’t make these decisions just based on his anecdotal results.

ready now

“Ubiq, you wrote:
“Also, not only is Dr. Zelenko …” No I didnt write that ”

However it is an excellent post and I agree with it

“He says the negative side effects are “theoretical in his experience.”
Then he needs more experience. (and raises questions about his supposed checking their EKG’s)

” but look as though they might need hospitalization if he doesn’t treat them immediately.”
not sure what that means. This is a nonesenical claim and is one that you made up .

He is treating those at high risk but mild symptoms who may have covid. period.
does this mean it works for all? – Of course not
does this mean it is safe for all – Of course not

does this mean the benefit outweigh the risk? – Maybe not enough data

See https://www.theyeshivaworld.com/news/general/1851562/trump-drug-more-deaths-no-benefit-from-malaria-drug-in-va-virus-study.html

RE – The problem is that people have Negious, esp. against Trump.

They are going to have a lot of studies that will try to disprove what he said.

If you paid attention to my posts – you’d see that I only recommended HCQ together with Zinc and early on in the disease.
They have proved this in-vivo. I posted the study above.
I know the Trump haters will do anything to disprove his words.
But the facts are – you really didn’t need a big Human study to prove that it works because of this NIH Article:
“Hydroxychloroquine, a less toxic derivative of chloroquine, is effective in inhibiting SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro.”

Ubiq,
“Also, not only is Dr. Zelenko …”
No I didnt write says ubiquitin, and ubiq yes, you are correct it was 2scents who wrote that.

Ubiq then did write about ” but look as though they might need hospitalization if he doesn’t treat them immediately.”
the following: “not sure what that means. This is a nonesenical claim and is one that you made up .”

No, no ubiq, the Dr, he has a heart, he can see the way things progress, he reacts with a brain and with compassion, but you ubiq see the end game when it is almost, just almost too late, but still not quite too late.

When people wait to confirm with tests, which are sometimes even unavailable, they loose time.
Timing is of the essence.

Dr Zelenko has success with almost 2,000 people. I’m sorry I don’t remember the exact number. Unfortunately, two people passed away nebach. In addition, this zinc, there’s also azithromycin, and of course the hydroxychloroquine. ALL THREE and each for their own reason.
We know this concoction has worked in other locations as well because there are many doctors that have used it and people are walking around today because of it. I strongly feel that the doctors who are the naysayers are the really the jealous ones who didn’t think of it and who unfortunately lost patience that they shouldn’t have. Instead of them being a bunch of people with attitudes who think that they are the healers, they should probably pull their knowledge and actually listen to other doctors who are having success with various types of medications.

Health,

“At least the FDA should approve HCQ as an emergent treatment.”

Rather let physicians prescribe treatments as they see fit, even if it is an off label use. A lot of treatments are off labels uses and are commonly done in medicine.

Politicians should not do anything to influence treatment guidelines, it is not their area of expertise.

Ubiq – is the extensive kidney damage you have seen a side effect of the covid or is the virus attacking the kidneys?

Syag

“Ubiq – is the extensive kidney damage you have seen a side effect of the covid or is the virus attacking the kidneys?”

nobody seems to know for certain. (There was just a webinar by ASN – leading nephrology group in the US, just last night!)
The prevailing thought is it is a side effect due to patient being in shock, low flow state leading to ATN (Acute tubular necrosis, sort of the similar to a heart attack but of the kidneys) most biopsies and post mortems have supported this.
BUT
I (and all colleagues IVe spoken to) have seen many many patients who’s blood pressures were not that sick (ie not in shock,) but with rapidly failing kidneys far out of proportion to their overall presentation.
the SARS-CoV-2 is known to bind to a receptor found in the kidneys (Ace2) and some theorize that it may be directly attacking that way
Another theory is that these pats seem to be hypercoaguable, menaing have a high propensity to form blood clots . could they be forming tiny blood clots int he kidneys?

Mattisyahu -“The FDA has to made medical decisions outside political concerns.”

But do they?!?

Syag
Agreed. no question the varying presentations is bizzare. And while GENERALLY younger/healthier tend to do better I have seen too many in their 40’s and younger with “no past medcial history” unfortunalty not doing well (in spite of HCQ + zinc)
The data from china obviosuly has to be taken with a heaping mound of salt, but I think the picture will become clearer in the coming months (though granted probably not compltly)

ready

“From an article on ywn today-‘ It seems that some otherwise improving patients experience rapid deterioration….”

We are going in circles. Yes Ive seen many many many such cases. but again vrtually ALL of the ones Ive seen HAD been on Hydroxychlorquine + zinc (and originally on azithromycin)
I have seen them go downhill, and fast in spite of the above. Dr Zelenko hasn’t Neither his experience nor mine puts the issue to rest.
We need studies. I’m not sure why you are having trouble with this

ready now

“That is the point. ”

I don’t understand your point. The patients Ive seen were also on HCQ “before they got that stage”
As I made clear from the onset. I don’t initate treatment for COvid, im a consultant who gets called in if/wehn they develop kidney problems. Almost ALL the patients ive seen have been on HCQ + zinc as soon as they showed up to the ER with fever/SOB/hypoxia etc

Let me try a new approach

A There are patients who get HCQ and get better
B There are patients who do not get HCQ and get better
C There are patients who get HCQ and do not get better
D There are patients who do not get HCQ and do not get better

I assume you agree that all 4 of the above patients exist. Please correct me if this assumption is incorrect.

Dr. Zelenko has seen mostly group A and as such is a strong proponent of it
Does that prove HCQ helps? Of course not If not for HCQ, what group would they have been in B or D ? Without more data how can you know. (keep in mind the vast vast vast majority of patients B”H fall in Group B)

I have seen mostly those in group C does that prove HCQ doesnt help ? of course not. These are aptients who almost definitely would have been in group D

Ubiq: if Dr. Zelenko’s numbers are true, I think you’re missing a critical point, or trying to oversimplify this. The key point being repeated in news articles is that most YOUNG & HEALTHY people will recover. Dr. Zelenko is only medicating those with pre-existing conditions, advanced age or both (with perhaps a few exceptions).

Yes it’s true only a clinical trial blah blah blah will give us a true picture. But in a few months hopefully this nightmare will be over, and even if it Ch”v comes back, it will be too late for way too many whose lives may be saved now.

ready
“as you keep saying most patients infected with COVID 19 do not get sick or recove”

This is a fact, that I was not aware was in dispute. Are you saying otherwise?

“But we are trying to avoid deaths so it would be better to intervene earlier if it will make a difference ”

100%!
but there is a critical caveat in that sentence see if you can find it..

“Dr Zelenko had 2 deaths out of 1450 patients”
This is a very misleading claim.
He only gave his treatment to 450 inclduign those who didnt meet inclusion criteria is not typicly how study data is reported.

” In the 405 high risk group a mortality of 5% would have been expected but 2 people died unfortunately, much less than the 20 expected.”
how do we know it wasn’t chance? How do we know it wasn’t something else about them?

“From “Doctors warn coronavirus causing blood clots and sudden strokes in young healthy patients”:
Im not sure what these last 2 paragraphs are adding

Mamale
” I think you’re missing a critical point, or trying to oversimplify this. ”
It IS quite simple:
There is not enough data. period Dr Zelenko would probably agree. (though hed add what do we lose, which is a fair point as IVe said from the onset)

“he key point being repeated in news articles is that most YOUNG & HEALTHY people will recover. Dr. Zelenko is only medicating those with pre-existing conditions, advanced age or both”
Most OF THEM recover too! Sadly not as many as the young and health y group. But I havent seen any data that >50% of those with pre-existing conditions, or advanced age who get infected succumb. Have you?

“Yes it’s true only a clinical trial blah blah blah will give us a true picture”
That is all Ive been saying I’m so glad we agree.