Hydroxychloroquine actually kills more patients than no treatment at all

[We Never Know]

your article is summarizing the same study I linked too, many more studies are being conducted as we speak, by summer we will have definitive information on this as well as other potential treatments

A virus has no cure. All we can do is treat the symptoms, isolate it, let it run its course, and hope that is that.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It means that someone (purposely?) used it in an unprescribed manner. It is incorrect to conclude that hydroxychloroquine doesn’t work against COVID-19 when used as proposed. This study is misleading. Misleading is poor science.

I thought the original evidence came from outside the US. Are you saying our FDA rules apply to other countries. I am pretty sure they do not apply to France or China, so using it probably is not unprescribed. Chinese doctors also claimed it for use on all stages based on one initial test. So much for your claim about early stage only.

 

[Lyndon]

The Chinese study said it didn't work, they did say the AIDS antiviral remisdivir(spelling) had potential though, and early studies are looking interesting for it.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

They used it on patients already hospitalized. That isn’t how anyone has proposed it should be used. It is supposed to be used in the early stages, not the terminal stages. This study doesn’t prove what you think it does.

The poorly designed original study was on patients already hospitalized. So how was it determined from that to use on patients that weren't hospitalized?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The Chinese study said it didn't work, they did say the AIDS antiviral remisdivir(spelling) had potential though, and early studies are looking interesting for it.

The one I read said it did and they were giving treatment recommendations. This was Gao, Tian and Yang, Feb. 19.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Again, no one ever suggested using it for advanced cases. It has been proposed for use in the early stages. You want to deny those that have a potentially fatal disease a potential cure because you hate Trump. And then you claim to just be following the science. And to boot you offer no alternative treatment.

It was originally proposed for use in all cases.

Oh good grief. So it would be better to give people questionable treatments that may do nothing or be harmful because the president you worship said to?

Why would I offer alternatives? Why would you expect me to? You didn't and I don't expect you to either, but I can see why you worship Trump. Whataboutism and passing blame unjustly fits the religion.

 

[Lyndon]

The one I read said it did and they were giving treatment recommendations. This was Gao, Tian and Yang, Feb. 19.

sorry, it doesn't work!!

 

[Dan From Smithville]

sorry, it doesn't work!!

I agree. I was relating what was claimed by one study and the recommendations that were made based on that. You indicated that original study did not claim it worked, but the one I read did make that claim. Unless I misunderstood you. I'll read back.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The Chinese study said it didn't work, they did say the AIDS antiviral remisdivir(spelling) had potential though, and early studies are looking interesting for it.

Again, the study by Chinese scientists that I read did claim efficacy. It was Gao, Tian and Yang, Feb. 19. Was the Chinese study you reference a different one, of earlier or later publication?

 

[Lyndon]

I don't remember, supposedly the South Koreans used it a lot but I've seen no hard evidence of that, just anecdotes, the French study was exposed as a fraud.

 

[We Never Know]

The one I read said it did and they were giving treatment recommendations. This was Gao, Tian and Yang, Feb. 19.

Feb 19? So these were test done and proven before the virus was rampant?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I don't remember, supposedly the South Koreans used it a lot but I've seen no hard evidence of that, just anecdotes, the French study was exposed as a fraud.

The bottom line is that we had a highly influential politician promoting the use of a poorly tested drug as if it were a guaranteed magic bullet. After swallowing that pill his followers were ready to swallow any pill he touted.

 

[Shad]

He pushed for it. He said it was good. He said it had been through the approval process for it. He promoted it and pushed it. He takes responsibility for his words!

Yet he has no power to prescribe medication. Aren't you a medical professional (mental side)? Do you treat patients based on what politicians say on TV?

 

[Shad]

He never takes the blame for anything. His defenders will assert he never told people to take it, he only touted it and claimed common sense. Next.

POTUS can not order citizen to take anything. Individuals can make their own choices. You are blaming Trump because other people act recklessly.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Trump doesn't have a medical miracle cure. He's not a doctor.

I don't think the drug necessarily kills more people as it already is a FDA tested and approved drug. Side effects maybe? From the way it sounds, it's nonetheless ineffective. I'm pretty sure they'll be looking at other alternatives and remedies.

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-...treat-covid-19-despite-little-proof-they-work

Immunology has got to be a difficult field.

Then he shouldn't be pushing drugs every day on television.

 

[Lyndon]

Trump is the one that acted recklessly promoting an unproven and dangerous drug.

 

[Revoltingest]

In the news....
Hydroxychloroquine shows no coronavirus benefit, raises death risk: study

 

[Shaul]

It was originally proposed for use in all cases.

Oh good grief. So it would be better to give people questionable treatments that may do nothing or be harmful because the president you worship said to?

Why would I offer alternatives? Why would you expect me to? You didn't and I don't expect you to either, but I can see why you worship Trump. Whataboutism and passing blame unjustly fits the religion.

The current proponents advocate for early use. Any other proposal is for those that advocate it to prove.

There are no proven alternatives yet. Excluding one simply because the occupant of the White House, who you happen to hate, thinks it should be looked into is politics, not medicine.

 

[Lyndon]

The current proponents advocate for early use. Any other proposal is for those that advocate it to prove.

There are no proven alternatives yet. Excluding one simply because the occupant of the White House, who you happen to hate, thinks it should be looked into is politics, not medicine.

So are you going to champion a drug that doctors say increases your risk of death because Trump recommends it, that would be stupidity IMHO

 

[Dan From Smithville]

The current proponents advocate for early use. Any other proposal is for those that advocate it to prove.

There are no proven alternatives yet. Excluding one simply because the occupant of the White House, who you happen to hate, thinks it should be looked into is politics, not medicine.

I have never claimed to hate Donald Trump and I have no need to hate him in order to recognize him for his numerous and expansive flaws. I do not have to be liberal in order to recognize them and correctly evaluate his poor leadership skills, ignorance and behavioral problems. It is a false statement to claim I hate him and is no more correct than claiming my recognition of a rabid dog indicates I hate that dog.

I have not evaluated and reached conclusions about the use of hydroxychloroquine based on the reckless promotion by a politician who is neither a physician nor a scientist and has no serious reason to promote it. My conclusions are based on the evidence that is currently available.

Your feelings must have truly been hurt by my old post for you to bother to respond to it after a month. To base your response on a twisted straw man is further telling. Thank you. It has been very educational reading your posts.