- This topic has 382 replies, 39 voices, and was last updated 1 year, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
huju -“It is a shocking indictment of most of the commenters on this news article that there are almost 250 comments discussing a medical issue that is settled. There is no need for further discussion, but that has not stopped us YWN folks from continuing to discuss the medical efficacy of hydroxychloroquine for any illnesses other than lupus and malaria.”
Obviously you Know Nothing about Medical Science.
There is a new disease that’s affecting Humans – it’s called Covid19.
All over the Medical literature & the public & politicians are discussing possible Cures.
This is why YWN has a topic about it!
It’s a shame that you use Sarcasm to make your point – that you’re against using HCQ for Covid19!!!“There is your study,”
that isn’t a study.
and that is a bit vague he had one death out of some 600 people. If in surronding districts they had multiple (2?) deaths out of 1200 then HCQ is no better than nothing. If it was multiple deaths out of 1500 then HCQ was worse than nothing….He said he’s release the data “soon”
when?
e’s been talking about it for months.
Tell him to skip his next interview and publish the dataOtherwise all we have is currently published data like the study in the lancet “Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis”
conclusion:
“We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. Each of these drug regimens was associated with decreased in-hospital survival and an increased frequency of ventricular arrhythmias when used for treatment of COVID-19.“How about discussing the Salk vaccine for curing hemorrhoids.”
Sure go for it. you can discus anything you want
with zinc
(I I don’t include zinc in every post ready now gets angry)
“(I(f) I don’t include zinc in every post ready now gets angry)”
Thanks for being considerate. .
Dear Ubiquitin,
Can I take hydroxychloroquine for malaria without zinc?n)mesora
If your doctor thinks its a good idea
(If you were my patient I’d say yes zinc has noting to do with malaria as far as I’m aware but this isnt really my turf so check with infectious disease)
Ubiq -“that isn’t a study”
Stop playing with the guy.
Btw, the conclusion that you brought down from the Lancet, is only an Obserational Study.
Don’t imply that’s the final word. I know that’s what you’re trying to Do!To Health: I know only a little about medical science, which is precisely my point. Yes, COVID-19 is new, and physicians and other scientists are just now learning about it. But uncredentialed commenters are taking odd bits of information from wherever they find it and jumping to unwarranted conclusions. That’s not science, that’s a bunch of bubameintsers (probably without the bubbies), and it is a waste of time. Maybe we need a new word: politicianmeintser? kibbitzermeintser? schmendrickmeinster?
huju -“But uncredentialed commenters are taking odd bits of information from wherever they find it and jumping to unwarranted conclusions”
That’s Not true! I can’t speak for others, but my posts are based on current medical knowledge.
Of course, in times like this, there will be many different Opinions!Health
“is only an Obserational Study.”
I wouldnt say “only” as it looks at 10’s of thousdands thats a lot of observation, and even if “only” observational, thats better that Dr. Z. so far I have seen no study produced by him.“Don’t imply that’s the final word. I know that’s what you’re trying to Do!”
nope. not what I’m trying to do. I don’t think there ever will be a final word .
Again, as a reminder what this thread is about (it has been running for 250 posts for almost 2 months so easy to lose track) The OP asked “Does anyone understand why doctors don’t want to give hydroxychloroquine even though it is working throughout the country”
I am not arguing to use it I am not arguing not to use it (I said this explicitly over a dozen times )I am just pointing out why some “doctors don’t want to give hydroxychloroquine even though it is working throughout the country” which is becasue Dr. Z just doesnt have a convincing argument. A observational study while clearly not the last word, does show that perhaps there is some bias coloring Dr. Z’s anecdotal reports.
oR Maybe not.
zinc
Dear Ubiquitin,
I looked up the first post. Perhaps it is asking about using hydroxychloroquine to treat malaria?Ubiq -“I wouldnt say “only” as it looks at 10’s of thousands thats a lot of observation, and even if “only” observational, thats better that Dr. Z. so far I have seen no study produced by him.”
I don’t care about Doc Z. And I don’t care whether he’s got proof.
I posted previously that I recommend HCQ & Zinc.Here’s a new observational Study:
From the NYU study:
“Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin plus zinc vs hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin alone: outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients
Philip Carlucci, et al.”“I don’t care about Doc Z. And I don’t care whether he’s got proof.”
That’s fine.
But that is the subject of the thread, and that is what I am addressingubiq wrote “perhaps there is some bias coloring Dr. Z’s anecdotal reports.
oR Maybe not.
zinc”
You are a joker who is capable of harming has v sholom!
You mention “zinc” floating it in the air, which De Z uses in conjunction with HOQ, simply so you cannot be accused of ignoring it! Very funny, but not the rest of your written inconsistencies.The proof that Dr Z is correct is that Dr Z’s turf had nearly no deaths compared to other areas. This is study beyond reproach.
The study recently featured in Lancet did not use Zinc!
ready now -“The proof that Dr Z is correct is that Dr Z’s turf had nearly no deaths compared to other areas. This is study beyond reproach.”
His study is Not a Study! Did your Yeshiva have High School?
He’s trying to explain Simple things to you!
Everything Ubiq wrote until my last post was correct.
Now with this NEW observational Study, @8:25pm, it’s obvious that HCQ & Zinc work against Covid19!!!
This has nothing to do with Zelenco. He didn’t invent the protocol. He just gave it in the Outpatient setting.” simply so you cannot be accused of ignoring it! Very funny,”
you are hard to please. You get upset If I don’t mention zinc
you get upset if I do .“The proof that Dr Z is correct is that Dr Z’s turf had nearly no deaths compared to other areas. This is study beyond reproach.”
Its not
As has been pointed out over and over. There are many many many people who have had no deaths. there are many many “high risk” patients who have had no deaths.To Health: In times like this, there will be many different opinions. But different facts?
And without facts, opinions are meaningless.
Dear Ready,
What do you think helped, the Doctor or the medicine?HUJU -“And without facts, opinions are meaningless.”
The facts are coming out slowly.
And They point that HCQ and Zinc is an option for Tx. of Covid19.The W.H.O. does not recommend this medication anymore.
RE -“The W.H.O. does not recommend this medication anymore.”
Did you bother to look into it? Or just you liked it because it was against Trump?!?
Well the article states they stopped it because of the Lancet’s Observational Study.
Maybe you should send them a copy of this study -“Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin plus zinc vs hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin alone: outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients
Philip Carlucci, et al.”; and then they will recommend HCQ & Zinc!Health
“because of the Lancet’s Observational Study. Maybe you should send them a copy of this stud…”
You say “observational” so derisively as if its useless “Btw, the conclusion that you brought down from the Lancet, is only an Obserational Study.” Yet you cite another observational study
Which showed that HCQ + zinc was better than HCQ alone. The Lancet study showed HCQ was worse than no HCQ. but what is better HCQ + zinc or no HCQ no Zinc ?Ubiq -“You say “observational” so derisively as if its useless”
Don’t PUT Words in my Mouth! I never meant or said that.
“Which showed that HCQ + zinc was better than HCQ alone. The Lancet study showed HCQ was worse than no HCQ. but what is better HCQ + zinc or no HCQ no Zinc ?”
Don’t ask questions – go look at the NYU study yourself!
You should be able to understand it – if you’re a Real Doctor.The recent Lancet study says –
“After controlling for multiple confounding factors (age, sex, race or ethnicity, body-mass index, underlying cardiovascular disease and its risk factors, diabetes, underlying lung disease, smoking, immunosuppressed condition, and baseline disease severity), when compared with mortality in the control group (9·3%),”
-that they cannot tell at all if HOQ is beneficial or not!
Because, they said-
“We were unable to confirm a benefit of hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine, when used alone or with a macrolide, on in-hospital outcomes for COVID-19. ”
Certainly, chloroquine is more toxic than hydroxychloroquine, but the antibiotics are also toxic.
The study does not even give doses that were administered, very. very significant omission!
Of course, also no zinc was used in the study!
The study is not valid.
Dr Z made a valid study which is apparently going to be published in about 2 weeks, it is a retrospective study, completely valid.
Dr Z did invent the regimen, he said so and said it was only with Hashem’s help, and he takes no credit for it himself.
In the NYU study of Philip Carlucci et ali-:
“Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin plus zinc vs hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin alone: outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients”It was also a retrospective observational study.
They wrote “Conclusion: This study provides the first in vivo evidence that zinc sulfate in combination with hydroxychloroquine may play a role in therapeutic management for COVID-19.”
The use of the word “may” is an unwarranted understatement.
“Don’t PUT Words in my Mouth! I never meant or said that.”
This is a verbatim quote from you: ““Btw, the conclusion that you brought down from the Lancet, is only an Obserational Study.””
“Don’t ask questions”
questions are always encouraged. Ask away, any question you have. thats what I love about this forum. f someone feels like answering the will (for free! no charge!) Of course if they don’t thats fine too. bu questions are always ok.
” – go look at the NYU study yourself!”
I didready now
“Dr Z made a valid study which is apparently going to be published in about 2 weeks, it is a retrospective study, completely valid.”
He said that over 2 weeks ago. Looking forward.“The use of the word “may” is an unwarranted understatement.”
I’m not sure if you read the study. The reason they put “may” is because the results are not so clear.
“In univariate analysis, the addition of zinc sulfate to hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin was not associated with a decrease in length of hospital stay, duration of mechanical ventilation, maximum oxygen flow rate, average oxygen flow rate, average fraction of inspired oxygen, or maximum fraction of inspired oxygen during hospitalization” It was only when they performed a bivariate logistic regression analysis, that they found a link. They also noted “after excluding all non-critically ill patients admitted to the intensive care unit, zinc sulfate no longer was found to be associated with a decrease in mortality” Whcih confirms the anecdotal data I’ve been mentioning.None of this invalidates the study of course. IT very well MAY change prctice.
But Dr. Z’ so far has produced nothing. Which is the subject of the thread.
Reminder this thread isnt about whether HCQ helps (with zinc) Its whther everyone should prescribe it becasue Dr. Z said so.
ready now
“The study does not even give doses that were administered, very. very significant omission!”
Lol! By saying that you indicate that you didnt read the study, and likely have never read any study ever, doeses are ALWAYS given..
“The mean daily dose and duration of the various drug regimens were as follows: chloroquine alone, 765 mg (SD 308) and 6·6 days (2·4); hydroxychloroquine alone, 596 mg (126) and 4·2 days (1·9); chloroquine with a macrolide, 790 mg (320) and 6·8 days (2·5); and hydroxychloroquine with a macrolide, 597 mg (128) and 4·3 days (2·0). ”
“Of course, also no zinc was used in the study! The study is not valid.”
Unclear to me , why that would make the study not valid. If you argue that it has no bearign on the use of HCQ + zinc, I could understand, but why doesnt it tell us that HCQ alone is not beneficial for covid19, and may even be harmful?
“The use of the word “may” is an unwarranted understatement.”
as the authors acknowledge “This study has several limitations. First, this was an observational retrospective analysis that could be impacted by confounding variables. This is well demonstrated by the
analyses adjusting for the difference in timing between the patients who did not receive zinc and those who did. In addition, we only looked at patients taking hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. We do not know whether the observed added benefit of zinc sulfate to hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin on mortality would have been seen in patients who took zinc sulfate alone or in combination with just one of
those medications. We also do not have data on the time at which the patients included in the study initiated therapy with hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and zinc. Those
drugs would have been started at the same time as a combination therapy, but the point
in clinical disease at which patients received those medications could have differed
between our two groups. Finally, the cohorts were identified based on medications
ordered rather than confirmed administration, which may bias findings towards favoring
equipoise between the two groups. In light of these limitations, this study should not be
used to guide clinical practice. Rather, our observations support the initiation of future
randomized clinical trials investigating zinc sulfate against COVID-19.”Its a bit strange that the authors ackowledge limitatiosn o the study but you (who clearly havent read it or the lancet study) say “The use of the word “may” is an unwarranted understatement.”
Dr. Z hasnt shown any study and has very limited anecdotal reports that don’t even tell us anything , and you jump on board.
Again to reiterate I am not disputing the study, and I am nto saying HCQ doesnt work.
Ubiq – “This is a verbatim quote from you: ““Btw, the conclusion that you brought down from the Lancet, is only an Obserational Study.””
When I wrote this – “Don’t PUT Words in my Mouth! I never meant or said that.”
I was talking about your line of – “so derisively as if its useless”.
“I was talking about your line of – “so derisively as if its useless”.”
Perhaps I exaggerated a bit,
but the word “only” is clearly derisive in context that it isnt as valuable as something else (whcih of course is true, if you had supplied say a RCT)
but to say “Btw, the conclusion that you brought down from the Lancet, is only an Observational Study” … “Here’s a new observational Study: From the NYU study:…” Is a bit funny.zinc
Ubiq – ” Is a bit funny. Zinc”
Funny or not; Now after these 2 observational studies – Will you give Zinc + HCQ for Covid19?
Remember – I said NOW.“Funny or not”
Oh cmon it’s funny. Be a sport.
“Will you give Zinc + HCQ for Covid19?”
meh
I was never opposed to it, IVe given it before if patient wants it I’d prescribe it
Ubiq, I read only the summary, I did not read the body of the Lancet study(sic).
BUT, I can tell you that THEIR DOSES WERE FAR TOO HIGH.
When coupled with no Zinc, gevalt!Dr. Zelenko uses these doses in his video “My response to Dr Rubin”:
“Here is my outcome data since 3/18/20 – 3/26/20669 patients seen in my Monroe, NY practice with either test proven or clinically diagnosed corona infection
0 deaths
0 intubations
4 hospitalizations for pneumonia – patients are on iv antibiotics and improving
As of 3/27/20 6am. As per WHO, CDC, ECDC, NHC
World statistics – 531,860 cases / 24,057 deaths = 4.5% death rate
US statistics – 85,653 cases / 1290 deaths = 1.5 % death rateDr Zelenko statistics – 699 cases / 0 deaths = 0% death rate
patients treated with three drug regimen
1- hydroxychloroquine 200mg twice a day for 5 days
2- azithromycin 500mg once a day for five days
3- zinc sulfate 220mg once a day for five daysCONCLUSION – TREAT AS EARLY AND AS AGGRESSIVELY AS POSSIBLE IN THE OUTPATIENT SETTING
Respectfully,
Dr. Vladimir (Zev) Zelenko”
They wrote “Conclusion: This study provides the first in vivo evidence that zinc sulfate in combination with hydroxychloroquine may play a role in therapeutic management for COVID-19.” from the NYU study of Philip Carlucci et ali-
The use of the word “may” is an unwarranted understatement.
That was a different study! Not the Lancet study.
“Ubiq, I read only the summary, I did not read the body of the Lancet study(sic).”
Lol before dismiss ing a study as “The study is not valid.” It’s good to read it. Keep in mind they aren’t doing it as a response to you or DrZ. HCQ, as you know , has fmgotten a lot of press. Trump claimed he took it, I don’t think he mentioned zinc.
Studying HCQ even without zinc makes sense.“The use of the word “may” is an unwarranted understatement.
That was a different study! Not the Lancet study”
Nope, those were limitations acknowledged by nyu
You guys can argue until tomorrow…
BH this is going to all be behind us.
“You guys can argue until tomorrow…”
At this point will be well past tomorrow.
I’m not even sure what it is we are arguigng about
2scents – “BH this is going to all be behind us.”
You claim to be a medical professional, but the latest Stats are – Covid19 will circulate like the Common Cold. E/o should Masks. The 6 foot rule is Not based on recent Science. Somewhere between 20 – 28 ft. indoors is the minumun amt. of safe distancing!
FROM- “Hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin plus zinc vs hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin alone: outcomes in hospitalized COVID-19 patients” by Philip Carlucci, Tania Ahuja, Christopher M Petrilli, Harish Rajagopalan, Simon Jones, Joseph Rahimian is the following-
“After adjusting for the time at which zinc sulfate was added to our protocol, an increased frequency of being discharged home (OR 1.53, 95% CI 1.12-2.09) reduction in mortality or transfer to hospice remained significant (OR 0.449, 95% CI 0.271-0.744). Conclusion: This study provides the first in vivo evidence that zinc sulfate in combination with hydroxychloroquine MAY play a role in therapeutic management for COVID-19.
Compare that to the “Lancet” published study shown here and you must see they are 2 different studies.-
“Hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine with or without a macrolide for treatment of COVID-19: a multinational registry analysis” by Prof Mandeep R Mehra, MD , Sapan S Desai, MD, Prof Frank Ruschitzka, MD, Amit N Patel, MD
Also , President Trump also took Zinc at the same time he took HOQ. he said so at a press conference.ready
“Compare that to the “Lancet” published study shown here and you must see they are 2 different studies.-”?
Of course they are two different studies.
Why are you having trouble with this, did you read either?The Lancet study had no Zinc, but the “Philip Carlucci, Tania Ahuja, Christopher M Petrilli, Harish Rajagopalan, Simon Jones, Joseph Rahimian” study HAD ZINC and they wrote that ZINC MAY play a role in therapeutic management for COVID-19.
There are no “limitations”, that is what they stated, despite having favorable results with the addition of zinc.
PS President Trump also took Zinc at the same time he took HOQ. he said so at a press conference.
“but the “Philip Carlucci, Tania Ahuja, Christopher M Petrilli, Harish Rajagopalan, Simon Jones, Joseph Rahimian” study HAD ZINC and they wrote that ZINC MAY play a role in therapeutic management for COVID-19.
There are no “limitations”, that is what they stated, despite having favorable results with the addition of zinc.”
EVERY study has limitations. Which is PRECISELY my point . Just becasue Dr. Z claims he had success does not mean Everybody has to follow him. The NYU study which actually provides real data unlike Dr. Z who said 6 weeks ago he’s release his “study” in 2 weeks, also has limitations as the authors acknowledge. They dont claim that “ok everybody has to use zinc” They say look it “may play a role” Its confusing to me that you are more excited by their results than they are
I provided them from the NYU study above Paragraph beginning “This study has several limitations. First, this was an observational retrospective analysis that could be impacted by confounding variables…” . posted om 5/27 at 10:07 AM
zinc
Sorry my mistake, I don’t know how I found the incorrect”no limitations”.
Zinc is the essential factor, there are in vitro studies to that effect I believe, that HOQ and zinc work together to kill the virus, correct me if I am mistaken.
Dr. Z has a retrospective study coming out soon.
We know intuitively that his results are very good.
It would be completely unbelievable that one area so close to others that had high mortality could escape without the Dr’s good judgment and treatment.
Since all studies have limitation, and in the absence of universal good judgment, the country has had to rely on “body count”, but still refuses to listen to a great extent.
“Dr. Z has a retrospective study coming out soon.”
super excited!
“Since all studies have limitation”
YES! Finally now do you understand the answer to Doing My best’s question posed 2 months ago “Does anyone understand why doctors don’t want to give hydroxychloroquine”
?I think you do! Glad to have helped
Not so fast ubiq!
Dr. Z has a retrospective study coming out soon.
We know intuitively that his results are very good.
It would be completely unbelievable that one area so close to others that had high mortality could escape without the Dr’s good judgment and treatment.
Since all studies have limitation, and in the absence of universal good judgment, the country has had to rely on “body count”, but still refuses to listen to a great extent……
that Dr Z’s results speak volumes!
Do you get it?
“Do you get it?”
Yep!
I got it over 2 months ago.“that Dr Z’s results speak volumes!”
Hopefully! So far he hasn’t released anything
“Dr. Z has a retrospective study coming out soon.”
Super excited! (Don’t hold your breath he’s been saying that for weeks)
“We know intuitively that his results are very good.”
No you know it intuitively. I want to see data
The data will support the intuition!
“The data will support the intuition!”
I certainly hope so.
Thwe question was “Does anyone understand why doctors don’t want to give hydroxychloroquine even though it is working throughout the country”
My answer was because there is no data to back it up. you say that there is a fellow’s intuition and he will evemtually release data to support his intuition (unclear what he is waiting for)
Do you understand why not all physicians would follow one guy;s anecdotal report with the promise for data to follow later?
.
Are the rioters and protesters all taking hydroxychloroquine?
Otherwise, how is it that they are not all infected, weren’t we told that if we open up society that the world will come to an end and all of us will be sick..?
“The data will support the intuition!”
I certainly hope so!
but back to the subject at hand. medical decisions shouldnt (necessarily) be made based on anecdotal reports by one doctor with promise that data will come later. Especially when other doctors report anecdotal reports in the reverse.
Is that really such a crazy thing to say?
note even if you think following one doctor’s anecdotal report is reasonable ( and I don’t disagree as I made clear over 2 months ago and dozens of times since) . You STILL agree with me unless you think aLL doctors should follow the report of one (or a few) doctor’s anecdotal reports
Zinc
“Are the rioters and protesters all taking hydroxychloroquine?”
Tear gas is loaded with zinc. Its the zinc that really stops the virus
Seriously though
a/”open up society that the world will come to an end and all of us will be sick..?”
nobody ever said that
b. give it a week or two. hopefully notThe riots and protests will prove to us if social distancing is necessary or not.
If there is no change in trends this means that social distancing is not necessary.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.