Yup. And any tangible truth in his statements will be used as a "I'm not to blame for all the deaths, they should've listened to me and prescribed hypothetrexitine from the very start like I said and all of those deaths would have been avoided"
The Trump Presidency | Biden Inaugurated
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Am I the only one who thinks that "badge of honour" is being given a lot of mileage by the media!
I mean the man can't articulate three words, let alone a sentence together, we know that. But to me, atleast, it seemed he was saying that the more testing they have done is a badge of honour rather than the number of cases.
There is lot of sticks to beat him with and he himself openly says some stupid stuff. I don't get why they have to go and twist his words.
I mean the man can't articulate three words, let alone a sentence together, we know that. But to me, atleast, it seemed he was saying that the more testing they have done is a badge of honour rather than the number of cases.
There is lot of sticks to beat him with and he himself openly says some stupid stuff. I don't get why they have to go and twist his words.
Isn't it supposed to be the other way around? Lucky escape?save them all Dwazza!
Seems the longer time goes on, the less of those I have about my time with my ex missus!
Maybe he was hoping that Hydroxychloroquine would be a miraculous cure & then he'd bask in the glory: "I told you I was right".
If it's so horrible, why has it been used for ages preemptively against Malaria?
This leaves two options: Either companies producing it have been lying for the same time about the severity of the potential side effects. Or there are certain interests at play currently that don't want Hydroxychloroquine being successful.
The limited research confirms what Trump has been saying. It works pretty decent when used very early on. It doesn't work when it's given late.
Yet, we haven't seen a single proper study with randomised controlgroups, let alone with zync being used.
I don't care who suggests certain treatments, but the moment Trump suggested this, we should have seen a proper study with proper methodology given starting treatment at different stages of the illness as well with or without zync. That would solve all discussion on the matter if it works or not. Yet more than 2 months later we have only seen lackluster research and a lot of politicising. Meanwhile we are potentially sacrificing life's for that.
-Hydroxychloroquine has been used for prophylaxis against Malaria in the past because Malaria is a killer condition, which still kills more yearly than Covid has managed to so far. It was used for this killer condition with a good body of evidence that it works. This is not the case for Covid, where no such body of evidence exists.
-Literally every single drug is potentially dangerous. Even Paracetamol or Aspirin. Any good doctor should be warning you of the potential common side effects and the potential life threatening side effects of any new medication you're being started on.
-For Hydroxychloroquine, we would often do an ECG before beginning the drug, as well as some at regular intervals afterwards.
-We rarely use it as an anti-malarial prophylactic drug anymore in the UK because of its side effects.
-Unless I'm completely out of the loop, I'd be interested to see this study you mention which shows it works very well early on (unless its the study I'm thinking of, which was a truly appalling study). Why are there no RCTs with Hydroxychloroquine? Firstly, there have been and secondly, there are many still ongoing. The RCT so far shows pretty much no benefit. The original study which kicked all this off also showed little useful benefit.
It is honestly a bit ridiculous you think that scientists across the world are 'politicising'. As if British, French, German, Chinese, Indian, Egyptian, Brazilian, Japanese, Australian,Vietnamese scientists...whatever have decided they're not going to properly test Hydroxychloroquine because they all don't want Trump to be right.
Last edited:
#Wrecked:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Would anyone be surprised if his claims of taking Hydroxychloroquine is bullshit?
Oh almost certainly they are.
It was mentioned on Twitter that the 2008 ruling was overturned in 2018, but I am having difficulty sourcing it.
The hilarity continues.
He didn't. But he could be under pressure from the drug company to sell this to the public. Even in times like this he's trying to find ways to make a fast buck.
A Republican strategist retweeting some random guy.
https://www.bridgemi.com/michigan-g...ichigan-mail-absentee-applications-all-voters
no idea how good a source that is though?
EDIT... looks legit https://ballotpedia.org/Michigan_Proposal_3,_Voting_Policies_in_State_Constitution_Initiative_(2018)
suspect GOP will go with a court case on this one? (does the change in rules about eligibility... overide the previous ruling about not posting applications? id guess not but thats why they will get lawyers on it
Last edited:
random guy who tweets links to case law to be fair
https://law.justia.com/cases/michig...shed/2008/20080626-c279966-42-279966-opn.html
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Sure, but that's easy. The hard part is knowing a) what it means and b) if it's still valid.
The GOP position on these things is absolutely laughable. It literally boils down to “we can’t let voting become easy, if anyone can do it we’ll lose”.
How many Americans realise that restricting easy access to voting to the extent they do is the sign of a broken democracy. It's another sign of how the Greatest Country on Earth is actually run like a banana republic.
republicans have a 4-3 advantage on the state supreme court... suspect GOP will try to roll the dice on having them decide
That's what I thought afro. But I might have been too generous to her during the initial period, and maybe a little hard on myself for the failure. Maybe that's all caught up with me.
But that's a story for another day.It always comes down to the supreme court in the US, it seems. We've got a supreme court in Norway, but I don't think they get a tenth of the amount of work these state supreme courts get. Though the Americans do take their Montesquieu very seriously.
I hear ya, I can relate. Save that story for another day then, and a few beersThat's what I thought afro. But I might have been too generous to her during the initial period, and maybe a little hard on myself for the failure. Maybe that's all caught up with me.
Still waiting on your visit!I hear ya, I can relate. Save that story for another day then, and a few beers
It took me until this moment to realize that was Ryan Reynolds in that scene. What a great movie the first Harold and Kumar was.But why? Is this like some bizarre form of uber-narcissism?
For a country that's so obsessed with the thought of freedom it's incredibly strange how things like this has been allowed to go on for so long. Voting is one of the most fundamental aspects of freedom yet you barely hear any outcry over how the government time and time again manipulates the ability for many to vote.
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Politicians rejoice: https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/product/2020/testing-new-conversation-settings.html
Of course. Obviously every single drug has side-effects. Thus it is even more important to have a PROPER study to be able to have a risk-reward assessment. There can be - and I use your wording - "no such body of evidence" when we don't do a proper study. Which is what I am clearly stating and you seemingly agree with.
If you wanted to have a proper study you would do the following:
1. Randomized trial. With placebo control group.
2. Either have all treatments done early - including cases where the patientes are given Hydroxychloroquine (=HCQ) as early as when Covid19 is just assumed and waiting for the test result - OR at different stages to be able to compare effectively how useful or not it is depending on the stage.
3. Record the dosage
4. Trumps (=his medical advisers) recommendation was with Zinc. So the study should involve zinc either altogether or again use some with and some without to be able to recognise its added effect. Bonus points for blood results to see the patients zinc levels and how it effects the severity of the illness.
5. Ideally do the testruns with and without Azithromycin (=Azitro) as well.
This really isn't rocket science and I think you would agree with that procedure considering you seem to have some knowledge about how studies are conducted.
So let me use two more recent studies here:
https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2766117
Problem 1: No randomised placebo controlgroup. At all. Hence, the paper itself admits it: "Although randomized double-blind clinical trials are the optimal study design"
Problem 2: Most patients were already on deaths door when HCQ and/or Azitro was used. The drug wasn't given randomly, but in many cases a last minute Hail Mary.
Read: "although 56.1% of patients in all groups entered intensive care within 1 day of admission."
And: "Similarly, more patients receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin (27.1%) and hydroxychloroquine alone (18.8%) than those taking azithromycin -alone (6.2%) and neither drug (8.1%) received mechanical ventilation."
And: "Among patients undergoing mechanical ventilation and receiving hydroxychloroquine + azithromycin, hydroxychloroquine alone, or azithromycin alone, 49.6% were ventilated before or concurrent with starting these treatments."
Essentially it says that people who were worse off got put on these drugs than those who didn't. Thus the entire study is pointless. And they even admit it themselves: "Fourth, the rapidity with which patients entered the ICU and underwent mechanical ventilation, often concurrently with initiating hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin, rendered these outcomes unsuitable for efficacy analyses."
"Fifth, adverse events were collected as having occurred at any point during hospitalization, potentially before drug initiation, although both medications were started on average within 1 day of admission; future studies should examine the onset of these events relative to drug timing."
Problem 3: No Zinc. Not even mentioned AT ALL in the entire document aka not even discussed why they didn't use it.
And this one: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2012410
Problem 1: "45.8% of the patients were treated within 24 hours after presentation to the emergency department"
Again it was given late into the infection considering most were in the EMERGENCY DEPARTMENT.
Problem 2: "Hydroxychloroquine-treated patients were more severely ill at baseline than those who did not receive hydroxychloroquine (median ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to the fraction of inspired oxygen, 223 vs. 360)"
Patients who were given HCQ were MORE severely ill than those that didn't get it -by quite the margin.
Problem 3: No Zinc. Not even mentioned AT ALL in the entire document aka not even discussed why they didn't use it.
And in case you want to mention the upcoming NIH study that at least uses an RCT approach: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04358068
Problem 1: Requirements for a positive Covid-19 test which delays the treatment rather than starting the treatment and just exclude those who turn out negative.
Problem 2: No control over the timing of the patients infection timeline. Is it early on in their infection or later?
Problem 3: Again no Zinc.
Bonus points: - Why only use blood tests for 10% of the participants?
- They assume another 23 weeks to follow the participants. While I generally do agree with it, even after 2 weeks of treatment of each individual patient we should already get some reasonable insight with this and Ih ope they will do give some temporary results before the 23 weeks are over.
Additionally above you were also refering to cardiac issues. The FDA mentions safety concerns as well: https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safe...oroquine-covid-19-outside-hospital-setting-or
Except there are zero numbers there. No study, no findings, no numbers, nothing. Just FDA saying there are risks. It's useless.
The FDA links to Poison Control saying this: https://www.poison.org/articles/chloroquine-hydroxychloroquine
Again no study, no findings, no numbers, nothing.
So how about some actual numbers for it?
The WHO tested the cardiotoxicity of different antimalarial drugs - including HCQ - in 2017: https://www.who.int/malaria/mpac/mpac-mar2017-erg-cardiotoxicity-report-session2.pdf
"4.1. What is the frequency of sudden death attributable to the cardiotoxicity of different antimalarial medicines?
Despite hundreds of millions of doses administered in the treatment of malaria, there have been no reports of sudden unexplained death associated with quinine, chloroquine or amodiaquine, although each drug causes QT/QTc interval prolongation."
The American College of Cardiology agrees with that:
https://www.acc.org/latest-in-cardi...loroquine-azithromycin-treatment-for-covid-19
"Despite these suggestive findings, several hundred million courses of chloroquine have been used worldwide making it one of the most widely used drugs in history, without reports of arrhythmic death under World Health Organization surveillance."
Additionally the CDC isn't even mentioning QT/QTc interval prolongations: https://www.cdc.gov/malaria/resources/pdf/fsp/drugs/hydroxychloroquine.pdf
"Hydroxychloroquine is a relatively well tolerated medicine. The most common adverse reactions reported are stomach pain, nausea, vomiting, and headache. These side effects can often be lessened by taking hydroxychloroquine with food. Hydroxychloroquine may also cause itching in some people.
All medicines may have some side effects. Minor side effects such as nausea, occasional vomiting, or diarrhea usually do not require stopping the antimalarial drug. If you cannot tolerate your antimalarial drug, see your health care provider; other antimalarial drugs are available."
The Versus Arthritis organisation agrees with these side effects for HCQ:
"skin rashes, especially those made worse by sunlight
feeling sick (nausea) or indigestion
diarrhoea
headaches
bleaching of the hair or mild hair loss
tinnitus (ringing in the ears)
visual problems."
feeling sick (nausea) or indigestion
diarrhoea
headaches
bleaching of the hair or mild hair loss
tinnitus (ringing in the ears)
visual problems."
For the readers here is a list of side effects of another commonly used drug:
ringing in your ears, confusion, hallucinations, rapid breathing, seizure (convulsions);
severe nausea, vomiting, or stomach pain;
bloody or tarry stools, coughing up blood or vomit that looks like coffee grounds;
fever lasting longer than 3 days; or
swelling, or pain lasting longer than 10 days.
upset stomach, heartburn;
drowsiness; or
mild headache.
severe nausea, vomiting, or stomach pain;
bloody or tarry stools, coughing up blood or vomit that looks like coffee grounds;
fever lasting longer than 3 days; or
swelling, or pain lasting longer than 10 days.
upset stomach, heartburn;
drowsiness; or
mild headache.
Aspirin
In the end HCQ is an antiviral drug. I am sure you do know that. When do antiviral drugs work the best? When given early / preemptively in order to delay the outbreak of the virus so the body has enough time to adjust and build up it's defenses. Naturally it does NOT work when given late into the illness.
Thus I would ask you to provide a single study that has proper methodology and uses HCQ early. Else Trumps statement that was quoted is simply correct.
Also why do I keep mentioning Zinc? Aside from Trump('s medical advisors) saying HCQ + Zinc, it at least for now has shown to have positive effects:
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.02.20080036v1.full.pdf
Results: "The addition of zinc sulfate did not impact the length of hospitalization, duration of Ventilation, or ICU duration. In univariate analyses, zinc sulfate increased the frequency of patients being discharged home, and decreased the need for ventilation, admission to the ICU, and mortality or transfer to hospice for patients who were never admitted to the ICU. 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)."
Unfortunately it doesn't mention, if the patients were randomised. But it definitely should be tested.
So how about using HCQ early or even pre-emptively?
https://www.preprints.org/manuscript/202005.0057/v1
"According to clinical picture at admission, hydroxychloroquine increased the mean cumulative survival in all groups from 1,4 to 1,8 times. This difference was statistically significant in the mild group."
"I in a cohort of 166 patients from 18 to 85 years hospitalised with COVID-19, hydroxychloroquine treatment with 800mg added loading dose increased survival when patients were admitted in early stages of the disease."
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S092485792030145X?via=ihub
"After a large COVID-19 exposure event in an LTCH in Korea, PEP using hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) was administered to 211 individuals, including 189 patients and 22 careworkers, whose baseline polymerase chain reaction (PCR) tests for COVID-19 were negative. PEP was completed in 184 (97.4%) patients and 21 (95.5%) careworkers without serious adverse events. At the end of 14 days of quarantine, all follow-up PCR tests were negative. Based on our experience, further clinical studies are recommended for COVID-19 PEP."
Italian study about Lupus and Rheumatoid Arthritis patients who naturally take HCQ:
https://www.iltempo.it/salute/2020/...-terapia-idrossiclorochina-sars-cov2-1321227/
"Out of an audience of 65.000 chronic patients, who systematically take plaquenil / hydroxychloroquine, only 20 patients tested positive for the virus. Nobody died, nobody is in intensive care, according to the data collected so far".
https://crstoday.com/articles/not-r...for-the-treatment-and-prevention-of-covid-19/
"Earlier this year, after the outbreak of COVID-19 in China, clinicians there noticed that none of the first 178 COVID-19 patients admitted to the hospital had lupus. The clinicians then evaluated 80 lupus patients treated in the hospital’s dermatology department and found that none was infected with COVID-19. This observation prompted researchers to evaluate hydroxychloroquine in vitro for the treatment and prevention of COVID-19. Not only did hydroxychloroquine treat cells infected with the virus that causes COVID-19, but the drug also protected cells from becoming infected.
This research provides basic science evidence that hydroxychloroquine should be considered for both the prevention and treatment of COVID-19."
Now are these studies perfect? Of course not. But they so far indicate that early HCQ usage COULD provide a benefit and thus we NEED to conduct a PROPER study which I mentioned in my original post.
Everyone can politicise something. From politicians to media to companies to individuals. Scientists usually are depending on being financed, thus I do not criticise those that are without funding. I criticise those making flawed studies and the media who uses (aka politicses) these flawed studies to paint a picture that isn't true. Why they does it and if they do it based on their own ideology or are the mouthpiece for other interest groups I can't tell you.
Ok boomer.
Seriously though, respect for the effort you've put in to writing this out. I didn't read it
Blimey, you got shares in the stuff or something?
Why?
Should we have also started a proper study on detergents when Trump suggested using them to cure the disease? What about injecting light on the body? Maybe combining bleach with light, and giving it on different stages of illness?
@Atze-Peng will find any contrarian hill to die upon if it presents itself. That’s fine though, we are short on trolls these days being so like-minded.
Alternative title: Non-scientist Explains How Politicized Scientists Made Flawed Studies.
Subheadline: Says Medical Science 'Is not Rocket Science'; Isn't Wrong.
Subheadline: Says Medical Science 'Is not Rocket Science'; Isn't Wrong.
Last edited:
Snnniiiiiffffff
Word of advice.... You're wanking too early in the day mate. Limit yourself, no wanks before, say 3pm, from now on.
Scientists have politicized climate change for decades according to these mouth breathers, wouldn’t be tough for them to think that the scientists might politicize the drug’s efficacy.
I find it incredulous that people in D.C and Puerto Rico do not have the right to vote
- Status