- This topic has 61 replies, 17 voices, and was last updated 4 years, 7 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Comments are not working so I’d like to add to the current data posted about the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine. I personally know 4 people wh o’s lives were saved with this drug. Additionally, Dr. Zelenko said you could call anyone in KJ and ask if anyone has died from coronavirus because he claims 100% success with it. THe reason doctors are so conflicted about this and there is bad rap about it may be the following points that were not considered:
!. At what point was the medication given to the patient — The later it is given, the less likely it is to work
2. Was it given with Zinc?
3. Were the levels given too high? (Many doctors start people off with 400 mg twice a day and this is a very dangerous dose to take )
4. Coronavirus has many different jpresentations. Perhaps many who make it to the hospital are the ones which the drug doesn’t help — however it does help many others
5. Were the patients on diabetes medication — very dangerous combo
6. Were they given an ekg before and heart monitored throughout>WIthout these answers, this report is WORTHLESS and could even be detrimental to the people this medication would help.
As an aside, Dr. Brownstein and other holistic practitioners have also claimed 100% success rate with healthier methods. You can look at his blog on his website.
I’ll leave it to some of our resident experts on bio-statistics (aka Charlie Hall and others) to comment on the malaria drugs the President has been hyping for Corona 19. Aside from the anecdotal Veterans Hospital study released today, a Task Force of 12 federal agencies issued guidelines that said there is NO proven drug for treating Corona 19 and the various Malaria Drugs should only be used in the context of a supervised clinical study.
I don’t know anything about this “Dr. Brownstein and other holistic practitioners other than ANYONE who claims “a 100% success rate” for ANY novel viral infection is either treating a statistically insignificant (or skewed) sample or lacks the diagnostic skills to make such a claim.h
Dr zelenkos claim can be invedtigated. Go to misaskim and see and check the shivas in Monroe.
I haven’t been to misaskim its to scary for meIn medicine, nothing has a 100% success rate.
That does not mean the treatment approach by these practitioners is not effective.
The problem with the narishkeit posted as a news story on this blog, where they clearly have turned those comments because they don’t want people commenting and going against their narrative, is that in the study of 368 people or so, the people were not given zinc. Dr zalenko gives zinc as well. Zinc is known to be needed for this. Making the claims of something not working, to the point of 0%, is like saying a person had a headache and was supposed to take Tylenol with water but they only took the water and they weren’t cured. No kidding!
I’m not sure what’s in it for YWN to put up stories like that as if they were halocha l’moshe m’sinai especially ones that make hard workers like Dr zilenko, who was put in countless hours a day and night over the past many weeks as well as the president due to the United States for having the audacity, in your eyes, to mention it. There’s nothing wrong with the president mentioning something as a possible good thing. The president is there to give us hope. Under previous administration all they did was talk about hope but there never was any!
“There’s nothing wrong with the president mentioning something as a possible good thing. The president is there to give us hope”
Nothing “wrong” as long as he/she also gives us the full context of his “good things” and also provides the negatives or “bad things”. I’m not a big fan of Cuomo but every day at 11 AM he does exactly that……the good and the bad and lets you form your own judgement. Trump has been touting this malaria drug “cocktail” every day as a “gamechanger”, great results etc. leaving it up to the other experts on the podium to clean up after him by giving the warnings and downsides. When his own Veterans Administration comes out with an anecdotal report saying that more of its patients treated with this cocktail, DIED than those w/o the treatment and that report was all over the news networks (including FOX) and he ignores it and then claims to be unaware of it, you can see the dangers of being an uninformed “cheerleader”. I do hope this drug or one of the 15-20 others in clinical trials does work but STOP pushing just one unproven option that can kill many CV19 victims with coronary conditions. He can simply say that this and OTHER treatments are under study and we hope to have the clinical results soon.
The Veterans study reported in the media is also not definitive. We need information from randomized clinical trials. Physicians should not be prescribing HCQ for COVID-19 except as part of a rigorous randomized clinical trial protocol. And there are many out there.
marbehshalom: Not everyone in Monroe is Dr. Z’s patient.
Yesterday, April 21st 2020, marks the day when the conversation on the malaria drug peters out. There have already been several studies showing that it’s no more effective than a placebo. Fox News and other conservative media have started mentioning its ineffectiveness and stopped touting it as a cure-all. I’m willing to bet that Trump will no longer mention it unprompted.
SRivka: you wrote “Additionally, Dr. Zelenko said you could call anyone in KJ and ask if anyone has died from coronavirus because he claims 100% success with it”. I listened and I think he actually said that all the people he treated with this protocol he had a success rate regarding the patients from having their conditions worsening and needing a ventilator.
I’m still on the fence. The media loves confusing people. According to Dr. Zelensky in the correct dose Hydroxychloroquine unlocks the door and Zinc fights the illness. The third medicine targets secondary infections. Maybe this study only tested Hydroxychloroquine. Next they’ll release news about only testing zinc and say that doesn’t work. Then they’ll test the two together but in too high doses and say that causes too many side effects. Then they’ll test hydroxychloroquine with zinc and azythromycin but too late in the game and say that doesn’t work. Then they’ll test it on people who in Zelensky’s opinion aren’t candidates for this treatment so that won’t work either. Eventually they’ll get to Dr. Zelinsky’s exact protocol and say wow this actually works. Of course there is the possibility that in pre-screening the patients who get this treatment Dr. Zelensky is selecting patients who would recover without the treatment and that it’s no better than placebo. I want to see the results of a trial duplicating Dr. Zelensky’s exact protocol. Unless they’re suppressing the news, I’m not seeing reports of people dying in KJ.
This discussion should not be taking place here. We posters in the CR are not professionals, not in medicine, pharmacology, or public health. The issues at hand are complex, and our lay opinions are worth nothing, even though we are entitled to have them.
Scientific research is a complicated process. One seeks to find a causal relationship, in this case, with the medication being effective. There are so many variables that make this far from simple. Dosage is only one of those. There are many physiological variables, the conditions of the patient, etc. that are relevant. The length of time, the combinations with other drugs, etc. These require controlled conditions, a sample that is sizable enough to be sure the results are not by chance, and the comparison to other interventions (or lack thereof). Two doctors using any particular medication in different places and under different conditions cannot compare or contrast their results.
The amount of time to resolution or cure is also a factor, as are side effects. We are all a bunch of fools shooting off our mouths about a subject that is beyond us. As much as I tend to support Trump, I believe it was not his place to speak to the public about this medication. He might say there are ideas being floated and examined by scientists and doctors, but he is not the one to push a medical agenda.
Yserbius, Trump has already stopped touting it. I’m not sure if Trump listened to Fox or Fox listened to Trump, but they’re basically a feedback loop.
I actually AM a professional in public health. The evidence for hydroxychloroquine is anecdotal. There are many clinical trials underway. Physicians who want to give it to their patients should enroll them into one of them. That is the only way we will learn the truth.
Search the web for “Five Problems With the Study That Claims ‘More Deaths’ From Treating Coronavirus With Hydroxychloroquine” by Matt Margolis.
It is hard to know. My wife was very sick and she took it for 5 days without going to the hospital. She is better now. Could be bc of hydro or maybe she was going to get better anyway.
Charlie:
Thx for the support.
The subject matter is that the pandemic here has too many unanswered questions, and this irritates the public. That is expected. So if there is a problem, there must be a solution. Simple paradigm that is one of the pillars of science. So the chatter about all kinds of things fills the airwaves. people use the phone, social media, and the internet to tout their ideas of what the answer should be. I want answers as badly as the next person. But I have been experienced in some scientific work, including research, and am keenly aware that anecdote may trigger one to ask more pointed questions, develop hypotheses, and even start investigating the matter. But doing so requires strategy, patience, and plenty of time. Men and puppies – characterized by impatience. So a word gets uttered somewhere, and it goes “viral”. Maybe it is a bit of an exaggeration (and maybe not) to say that the stories about the drug spread farther than the actual virus.
It is so sad that there is a ton of anecdote that dominates the above mentioned airwaves. It fuels the anti-vaxx movement, the proliferation of “miracle workers” such as advertise their anti-ayin horoh remote removal skills, and a huge chunk of the alternative health care market. And when the research gets done, so many of these baseless endeavors are proven to be shams. It is appropriate to ask questions and investigate. But science requires more than a few stories.
Fire the messenger when you don’t like the message. Today, HHS removed Dr. Rick Bright the head of its Division that funds new and innovative vaccine research (called BARDA) for objecting to the priority being given to funds for the Trumpkopf’s favorite malaria drug cocktail for treating Covad 19 over other experimental drugs with equal or greater potential efficacy. So much for speaking truth to power. Tonight, at his news conference, he made the head of CDC grovel for stating that the virus would likely return in the Fall when the Trumpkop9f had predicted it “will be gone”….”disappear, as miraculously as it appeared”….etc.
Katan Hasheker, that is an outright LIE. Bright was fired for incompetence and insubordination, NOT for any objections (which he DIDN’T HAVE) to the promotion of hydroxychloroquine.
The fact that he is represented by the same gutter lawyers who slandered Brett Kavanaugh should be enough to tell you what a liar he is.
Gadolhadorah -“over other experimental drugs with equal or greater potential efficacy”
Please tell us, us layman, even though I’m not, which drug has greater potential efficacy?
Do you really think that by talking down to us makes you the smarter one?!?Millhouse: Several colleagues of Rick Bright (including former FDA Director Dr. Scott Gotleib who knows him very well) and industry research directors have all said he was an outstanding researcher with a great understanding of commercialization of new drugs. You don’t change fire chiefs in the middle of fighting a fire. He was “insubordinate” like so many others from the WH perspective, because he had the chutzpah to say that the stupidity of the Trumpkopfs rants at his daily WH press briefings should not influence funding decisions for clinical trials. That apparently upset some young “white house liason” at HHS who ordered him transferred. And yes, the lawyers he hired for the past 10 years have been rated as the top litigators in D.C. for the narrow issue he is raising. I suspect you would have hired a DWI lawyer to litigate a whistle blower lawsuit.
P.S. If you haven’t followed, the WH personnel office has been sending over its own Trump loyalists to monitor every agency in the role of “liaisons” for political conformance. They can overrule agency directors on personnel matters. Believe what you want.No, Katan, stop lying. The decision to fire him for incompetence and insubordination was taken late last year, long before the current crisis began. And the record shows that he SUPPORTED use of hydroxychloroquine.
But had he said that ” that the stupidity of the Trumpkopfs rants at his daily WH press briefings should not influence funding decisions for clinical trials”, as you claim, then that would be insubordination and chutzpah, and he deserved to be fired for that alone. He seems not to have accepted that he worked for the president, and was required to show him respect and obey his orders just like any employee must show respect and obedience to his employer. No matter what he privately thought of Trump’s opinions, they MUST influence department decisions, because it’s his department.
Milhouse: We have to go back to another President with a familiar middle name to find precedents for demands of TOTAL and ABSOLUTE fidelity by subordinates. I’m fairly familiar with the facts in this case and it is clear the transfer decision was a direct result of Dr. Brights insistence on using the objective criteria (as required under the appropriations bill language) in the allocation of BARDA grants. Reprogramming funds in response the the whims of a President (especially when all his own experts counsel against it) is contrary to HHS’ own guidelines. There is a process for reprogramming (that you probably are familiar with) that requires prior notice and consultation with the Chairs and ranking members of the relevant appropriations committees. That was not done here.
FT reporting in the past hour that Gilead terminated its randomized clinical trials of the drug Remdesivir in China since the results did not warrant continuation. This was another one of the drugs touted by the President in his self-proclaimed role of “Good New Donald”. There are still other ongoing studies of this same drug in the U.S. so hopefully they might offer more positive outcomes.
There is a high likelihood that one of these drugs in clinical evaluation will show positive outcomes, but it may take weeks or months. However, promoting individual drugs on the basis of political connections, rumors or “whims” is reckless and dangerous.Katan, get this straight: The HHS works for the president. It is NOT ENTITLED to have its own “guidelines” and “processes” against the president’s wishes. And anyone there who pursues his own agenda rather than the president’s needs to be fired immediately, because that is what insubordination means.
Milhouse: I do have it straight but thanks anyway for your comic relief. Fortunately, there are serious non-partisan, career professionals in government who are more concerned about life and death and the public welfare then the Trumpkpf’s fragile ego. Some have learned to play the game and “praise” the President and genuflect to his grandeur before saying how dumb his comments are. (Fauci and Birx are good at it). I respect them because they we are all better off that they are at the table when decisions are made even if they have to occasionally swallow their pride and engage in the “game” of feeding Trump’s seemingly bottomless hole of insecurity and need for adulation. Dr. Bright decided to go public and that was his decision.
P.S. Good news is that Gilead has disputed the FT article on the China Remdesivir study and says they terminated the trial for “low-enrollment” and other technical reasons rather than a failure to achieve positive outcomes. There are some other ongoing clinical trials of that anti-viral drug in the U.S. that still might show some efficacy.
“The HHS works for the president. ”
That is not true at all. HHS works for the American people, fulfilling mandates from Congress as enacted into law. Dr. Bright does not work for the President. He works for all of us. The US is not a monarchy and Trump is not a King. Note that Trump can’t even fire Dr. Bright, only reassign him from where he is needed to somewhere else.
How many people need to die for you to stop drinking the Kool Aid?
“Could be bc of hydro or maybe she was going to get better anyway.”
And that is precisely why we need proper randomized studies that are large enough to see whether HCQ is better that just letting people get well on their own. The people who are prescribing HCQ other than in the context of a clinical trial are delaying the time when we will know whether it works or not.
“Thx for the support.”
You are welcome!
“Bright was fired for incompetence”
He wasn’t fired, he was reassigned. And he is definitely not incompetent, unlike most of Trump’s Administration.
Oh Charlie -“The people who are prescribing HCQ other than in the context of a clinical trial are delaying the time when we will know whether it works or not.”
It’s a good thing you’re just a Researcher, not s/o licensed to practice Medicine.
Why don’t you ask your wife doctor which American society says to give HCQ or CQ, and Not only in a clinical trial?
And don’t come back & tell me that they only did it because of King Trump!
LOL.I’m not a scientist. And i don’t need to be one to notice that KJ has barely any deaths. Yes, they do have rabbonim. they even have regular senior citizens. Dr. Zelenko has been giving at-risk patients Hydroxychloroquine. so for all those sane people out there, here’s a multiple choice question:
What does does the above info mean?
A) KJ got very lucky.
B) KJ had a huge neis.
C) Hydroxychloroquine helped KJ, but it’s not scientifically proven so don’t take it anyways.
D) HYDROXYCHLOROQUINE RELIEVES SYMPTOMS SO TAKE IT!(disclaimer: more than one answer may be correct.)
Current Infectious Diseases Society of America Recommendations:
Recommendation 1. Among patients who have been admitted to the hospital with COVID-19, the IDSA guideline panel recommends hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine in the context of a clinical trial. (Knowledge gap)
Recommendation 2. Among patients who have been admitted to the hospital with COVID-19, the IDSA guideline panel recommends hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine plus azithromycin only in the context of a clinical trial. (Knowledge gap)My wife is a family physician. Still seeing patients in clinic. Here is what her professional association, the American Academy of Family Physicians, says:
The American Academy of Family Physicians, which represents 134,600 members, acknowledges the pressures facing the healthcare system to rapidly address the COVID-19 pandemic through testing, treatment, and preventive measures.
The AAFP urges caution as no medication has been approved by the FDA for use in patients who have COVID-19. Further, there is currently no substantial evidence supporting the off-label use of medications, such as chloroquine, hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, and remdesivir for the treatment of COVID-19. While there have been limited studies performed, with varying degrees of success, the data do not support improved patient-oriented outcomes with these medications. Until further testing is completed, the AAFP cautions against prescribing these medications outside of their current indicated uses.
In addition, the AAFP advises against these medications being stockpiled or prescribed as a preventive measure for the public at large. Family physicians should continue to provide these medications for conditions where there are approved indications, such as for patients who have autoimmune disorders or parasitic infections and should not be penalized for doing so.
The AAFP also supports the rapid evaluation of potential treatments through registered clinical trials and calls for the publications of full results in a transparent and timely manner.
The AAFP calls for clinicians, healthcare systems, and policy makers to carefully consider the evidence and effectively weigh the benefits and the harms of any treatment. Given the increased burden on the healthcare system at this time, judicious and evidence-based use of limited resources is even more critical.
Charlie:
Absolutely correct. The lead on this issue must come from the scientific experts. And both of us have referenced the rigors of true scientific study, and that outcomes are not something that lends to casual chatter among the lay public and anecdotal information. I have no problem hearing any of these anecdotes, and giving a response like, “sounds interesting”. But the uneducated public takes these tidbits of info and they run wild. And the media is no better. One of these days, someone might produce a best seller documenting some of the wildest and most ridiculous things that were circulated among the lay public (social media is a major culprit here) as panaceas.
I know quite a few people who were sick and B”H recovered. The course of their illness was marked by their particular pattern of symptoms, plus a barrage of messages from friends, family, and others about how they need to start running to certain doctors, requesting certain medications, etc. Let’s not omit the plethora of snake oil suggestions that mean absolutely nothing.
I wish the discussion about all these things was dominated by those with the knowledge and training, topped off with scientific responsibility. It is likely that in these days of twitter, facebook, and other social media, these hopes are futile.
Oh Charlie, – “Current Infectious Diseases Society of America Recommendations:
Recommendation 1. Among patients who have been admitted to the hospital with COVID-19, the IDSA guideline panel recommends hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine in the context of a clinical trial”For a Researcher – It sure took you a LONG Time to find this Recommendation!
BTW, my post was based on the American Thoracic Soceity Guideline.
Since it takes you SO LONG to find guidelines – I quoted it HERE:“For hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 who have evidence of
pneumonia, we suggest hydroxychloroquine (or chloroquine) on a case‐by‐case basis.
Requirements include all of the following: a) shared decision‐making
in which the patient is informed about the possible benefits and
potential side effects, b) collection of data in a manner that enables studies that use valid methods for
causal inference and control of confounders for the purpose of interim assessment, c) the patient’s
clinical condition is sufficiently severe to warrant investigational therapy, and d) there is not a shortage of drug supply”Charliehall, of course the president is not a king; unlike Louis XIV he is not the state, but he is the executive branch. He does not “work for” or “head” the executive branch, he is it. HHS and Dr Bright work in an executive function, therefore they do NOT work for the people, they work for Donald J Trump, and it is their duty to implement his agenda without question.
That Trump can’t fire individual employees is a matter of civil service protections imposed by Congress. I doubt they are completely constitutional, but so far nobody has tested that. I would guess the best argument for them is that Congress appropriates money for the president to pay his employees on condition that he follows these regulations. But they are his employees, not Congress’s, let alone “the people’s”.
And yes, Bright was removed from his assignment for incompetence and insubordination. I have no reason to believe he is competent, and am certainly not going to take your word for it. Or for anything.
“It sure took you a LONG Time to find this Recommendation!”
I have more important things to do than answer questions in coffee rooms. Among other things, I am involved one way or another in FIVE current or proposed COVID-19 studies. I had not been in this chat for five days.
And regarding the ATS guidelines, you failed to note two things. First, you neglected the following:
For patients with COVID‐19 who are well‐enough to be managed as outpatients, we make no suggestion either for or against hydroxychloroquine (or chloroquine). 18% for intervention, 36% no suggestion, and 46% against intervention.
For hospitalized patients with COVID‐19 who have no evidence of pneumonia, we make no suggestion either for or against hydroxychloroquine (or chloroquine). 8% for intervention, 50% no suggestion, and 42% against intervention.
You also failed to note that those recommendations are dated April 3 and do not reflect updated knowledge.
“HHS and Dr Bright work in an executive function, therefore they do NOT work for the people, they work for Donald J Trump, and it is their duty to implement his agenda without question.”
That is false. The mission of the National Institutes of Health is not defined by Donald Trump. It is defined in a law passed by Congress.
“am certainly not going to take your word for it. Or for anything. ”
Fine. Go inject the Clorox if you believe Trump rather than me.
Charlie H
“ You also failed to note that those recommendations are dated April 3 and do not reflect updated knowledge.”
In normal times April 3rd would have been considered very current, now with so much new information coming in on a daily basis, April 3rd is considered outdated…
All these studies tested it on half dead patients. They’re not studying the right thing. Hydroxychloroquine helps prevent Coronavirus symptoms from worsening. For example it reduces lung swelling. So when they test coronavirus on basically dead people of course it doesn’t work. They’re too far gone. Anyone who ignores this fact is not using their intelligence. The bottom line is that dr. Zelenko only had about 2 deaths out of a thousand at-risk patients which is incredible. Considering the fact that none of his patients had heart attacks you might be wondering what the downside is. And you’re probably right!
Charlie, does the National Institutes of Health exercise the legislative power, the judicial power, or the executive power? Which branch is it in? Unless you assert that it is part of the legislature or the judiciary, you must admit that it works for Trump, because the executive power is vested in him and him alone. Nobody but him can exercise it. And that means they are his employees and must obey his orders and work faithfully for his agenda.
And you shamelessly lie yet again when you claim that Trump told anyone to inject Clorox. It is a deliberate lie that your Democrat compatriots who parade as “journalists” made up for the express purpose of defaming him.
Oh Charlie, –
“And regarding the ATS guidelines, you failed to note two things. First, you neglected the following:
For patients with COVID‐19 who are well‐enough to be managed as outpatients, we make no suggestion either for or against hydroxychloroquine (or chloroquine). 18% for intervention, 36% no suggestion, and 46% against intervention.”LOL!
You didn’t Mention it Either!
Your Post:
“Recommendation 1. Among patients who have been admitted to the hospital with COVID-19, the IDSA guideline panel recommends hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine in the context of a clinical trial. (Knowledge gap)
Recommendation 2. Among patients who have been admitted to the hospital with COVID-19, the IDSA guideline panel recommends hydroxychloroquine/chloroquine plus azithromycin only in the context of a clinical trial. (Knowledge gap)”“You also failed to note that those recommendations are dated April 3 and do not reflect updated knowledge.”
Oh for sure – the IDSA guidelines on April 11 is Much Later than April 3.
LOL Again!Here is a Much Newer Study than what IDSA GUIDELINES Were based on:
“In early April, Chinese scientists published a study looking at 62 patients with mild cases of Covid-19. Unlike the French trial, the study was randomized and the treatment and control groups were comparable. The study found a statistically significant difference in the time it took the two groups to recover, with patients who received HCQ showing shorter periods of fever and cough.”Dong my best
“All these studies tested it on half dead patients.”
I’m not sure what “half dead” means. The patients IVe seen got it when they arrived int he ER most of them had fever and SOB.“The bottom line is that Dr. Zelenko only had about 2 deaths out of a thousand at-risk patients which is incredible.”
Where did you get a thousand, he says a few hundred? If his results are so impressive why the need to exagerate?“Considering the fact that none of his patients had heart attacks you might be wondering what the downside is”
not wondering , we know the downside. Its an old drug IVe used it for years in lupus nephritisUbquitin,
You’re right. my number was off. I found this on matzav (I’m sorry ywn)
“ The doctor will be publishing a study next week in a top journal documenting the data of 1,450 patients seen by his practice. 405 were treated (with 3 drugs, HCQ, Zinc), 2 patients passed away, 4 are off respirators. 5-6 were admitted with pneumonia and most are back home.”
Still MUCH better than normal. That’s 2 out of 400 deaths! And even if from that batch 1 or 2 more patents r”l die, it is still amazing results. Go ahead, ask all kinds of questions. For some reason many Establishment scientists have a hard time thinking out of the box. If it is worth treating people right when the come into the ER, no matter they’re condition, ( yes, I know people who went in because they were scared and were given it) maybe we should give it to people when they’re still relatively healthy so that they shouldn’t have to go to the hospital. I personally think that many ( not all) scientists/ doctors/ media who have decried hydroxychloroquine are now actually hoping that it doesn’t help coronavirus because they’d be embarrassed. And it’s only human nature to subconsciously make sure no one else realizes that it might work.Here’s a question to ask yourself, if we gave anyone who asked for it hydroxychloroquine, and then the amount of deaths fell by 50% would you say that it works or would you say that there’s still no evidence that it works because there was no control group etc. ?
Doingyourbest. Possibly….if all those who asked for the drug were supporters of a certain political leader who had been hyping the drug and were willing to give their lives to make a political statement. I think you know how silly you mashal is in the context of a any decision on the public health benefits and efficacy of a drug with potentially deadly side effects. Instead, consider the outcome of drug trrials like that announced today for Redesevir which while very preliminary, was still sufficiently well-designed and statically significant so as to allow even the conservative Dr. Fauci to say, “lets go for it” and allow immediate prescribing under supervision.i
“For some reason many Establishment scientists have a hard time thinking out of the box”
I don;t know what “establishment scientists” And I’m not sure hwat you mean by “thinking outside of the box” Dr. Z didnt come up with this regimen, (he doesnt claim to have).
“Here’s a question to ask yourself, if we gave anyone who asked for it hydroxychloroquine, and then the amount of deaths fell by 50% would you say that it works or would you say that there’s still no evidence that it works because there was no control group etc. ?”
“anyone” is a lot of people. And there WOULD be a control group. you said “deaths fell by 50%” compared to what? whatever the answer to that question is THAT is the control.
In Dr. Z’s patients 405 got it and did well compared to whom? There are literally thousands and thousands of “high risk patients” who did not get HCQ and did just as well .
“I personally think that many ( not all) scientists/ doctors/ media who have decried hydroxychloroquine are now actually hoping that it doesn’t help coronavirus because they’d be embarrassed”
The reverse is true too. Even after there is increasing data that it doesn’t work people are sill insisting that it does . Its kind of strange actually.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.