Is hydroxycloroquine really efficient at treating covid-19?

[SG854]

Doctors Claim Hydroxychloroquine is a cure and prevention for Covid-19. Along with azithromycin or doxycycline, and zinc.

Doctors says the WHO (World Health Organization) claims Hydroxychloroquine is not effective because of the studies that gave too much &/or treated at wrong times. But in right amount and treated at the right time is a cure for Covid-19. They say its very safe to take.

Doctors say people are needlessly dying because of Politics and Hydroxychloroquine being shut down. That there's no need for Schools to Shut Down, no need for businesses to shut down and loose money. Suicide, Spousal Abuse and many mental health problems have gone up as a result of lock down. And these things are needlessly happening.

So it seems like Trump was right about Hydroxychloroquine. That he wasn't spreading false information. He was just listening to the advice of doctors and health experts. But they censored him and censored what could be life saving medical information. This is violation of section 230. Censoring the person we need to be able to hear which is our very own President of the United States after he shared this information.

People and experts say the we should listen to the Doctors, people with real expertise. I am not a Doctor, and many of you aren't Doctors. But the people in the video, in the link below are doctors. So based on that advise we should listen to them. But Andy Stone says they removed the video from face book because it contained false information. But Andy Stone is not a Doctor. And he thinks the Trump video of the Doctors should be overwritten by the WHO as if they are the only gate keepers of information.

Facebook, Google/YouTube, Twitter Censor Viral Video of Doctors' Capitol Hill Coronavirus Press Conference


The Key to Defeating COVID-19 Already Exists. We Need to Start Using It | Opinion

 

[SG854]

LA Doctor says that prescribing Hydroxychloroquine in Conjuction with Zinc says that all his patients were symptoms free within 8 to 12 hours. But it needs to be used with Zinc to be effective. This was posted 3 months ago on ABC News.




Another article saying countries that use Hydroxychloroquine have lower fatality rate then countries that don't, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons say.


https://techstartups.com/2020/07/23...ssociation-american-physicians-surgeons-says/


Also a separate study also shows success with Hydroxychloroquine and Zinc.


https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.02.20080036v1

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

It really seems like the reason why media is pushing hard against Hydroxychloroquine is because Trump supports it and recommends it based on medical advice. Lots of political bickering and tribe mentality. People are choosing politics over other peoples lives.

It also seems like the studies that say its ineffective are flawed. They prescribed too much which can be dangerous. Or didn't prescribe at the right time. But there has been effective successful use when used right.

 

[SG854]

So about 100 million doses of Hydroxychloroquine were given to federal agencies but hardly any released to the public as the article states. So Trump knows exactly its effectiveness, which is why he recommends it, and why he posted the video about its effectiveness before it got taken down by major social media networks.

South Korea, India, Turkey, Russia and Israel are countries that encourage Hydroxychloroquine use and have been most successful at combating Covid-19.

And many people use South Korea as a good example on how to properly combat Covid-19 because of their lower mortality rates and high success rates.

 

[Deleted member 507653]

Some interesting articles thanks

 

[Seliph]

Here's a pretty long excerpt from this article that you should read:

Spoiler: Excerpt

Amid growing evidence the drug is not effective, the FDA announced in June that it had revoked the EUA for the drugs because they are “unlikely to be effective in treating COVID-19 for the authorized uses in the EUA,” and that the “known and potential benefits” of the drugs “no longer outweigh” the risks — which can include “serious cardiac adverse events and other potential serious side effects.”

A large randomized controlled study called RECOVERY, in the U.K., reported in a preprint, which hasn’t been peer-reviewed, that hydroxychloroquine wasn’t associated with reduced mortality — and was actually associated with “an increased length of hospital stay and increased risk of progressing to invasive mechanical ventilation or death.” The study said that 26.8% of the 1,561 patients given hydroxychloroquine died within 28 days, whereas 25% of patients given usual care died in that time span — a difference that was not statistically significant.

The authors wrote that “these results indicate that hydroxychloroquine is not an effective treatment for patients hospitalized with COVID-19.”

Another study published July 16 in the Annals of Internal Medicine — a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that involved more than 400 participants — found that “hydroxychloroquine did not substantially reduce symptom severity in outpatients with early, mild COVID-19.”

There was one observational study by the Henry Ford Health System, published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases on July 1, that found hydroxychloroquine was associated with lower mortality for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. But, as we’ve explained before, the study has limitations — and it stands in contrast to multiple randomized controlled trials that have found the drug is not beneficial to hospitalized patients (and two other observational studies).

During the press conference, Immanuel also claimed that a 2005 study “said it works.”

That study — which found that “[c]hloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS-CoV in cell culture” — “is no evidence at all that it’s a cure for COVID,” Schluger said.

“That was a different coronavirus; that was the coronavirus that causes SARS,” he said. Secondly, he said, the study involved cells in test tubes. Potential drugs are evaluated in test tubes, then in animals, before they move into the three phases of clinical human trials, he said — and 90% of drug candidates that make it to human trials fail because they aren’t effective or aren’t safe.

A study in a test tube involving a different virus, Schluger added, is “not how the FDA approves drugs.”

Multiple tests have shown that Hydroxychloroquine simply doesn't work.

This article you cited is not peer-reviewed, I would not trust it. Plus it only states "hydroxychloroquine may play a role in therapeutic management for COVID-19." Not only does it not definitively state whether or not hydroxychloroquine is even effective, it certainly doesn't call hydroxychloroquine a "cure".

And this article you cited is from the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, a conservative non-profit. They also claim that HIV does not cause AIDS, that being gay reduces life expectancy, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. Not a good resource either.

So, yes, you are correct that these "doctors" are being censored, but that's for good reason. It's because they're wrong. It has been proven multiple times that hydroxychloroquine is not a cure, to suggest otherwise is simply wrong and dangerous.

 

[SG854]

Some interesting articles thanks

If this is true I can see why Trump pulled out of the World Health Orginization.

I smell conspiracy.

 

[phalk]

Nope.

Here's a pretty long excerpt from this article:

Spoiler: Excerpt

Amid growing evidence the drug is not effective, the FDA announced in June that it had revoked the EUA for the drugs because they are “unlikely to be effective in treating COVID-19 for the authorized uses in the EUA,” and that the “known and potential benefits” of the drugs “no longer outweigh” the risks — which can include “serious cardiac adverse events and other potential serious side effects.”

A large randomized controlled study called RECOVERY, in the U.K., reported in a preprint, which hasn’t been peer-reviewed, that hydroxychloroquine wasn’t associated with reduced mortality — and was actually associated with “an increased length of hospital stay and increased risk of progressing to invasive mechanical ventilation or death.” The study said that 26.8% of the 1,561 patients given hydroxychloroquine died within 28 days, whereas 25% of patients given usual care died in that time span — a difference that was not statistically significant.

The authors wrote that “these results indicate that hydroxychloroquine is not an effective treatment for patients hospitalized with COVID-19.”

Another study published July 16 in the Annals of Internal Medicine — a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that involved more than 400 participants — found that “

ydroxychloroquine did not substantially reduce symptom severity in outpatients with early, mild COVID-19.”

There was one observational study by the Henry Ford Health System, published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases on July 1, that found hydroxychloroquine was associated with lower mortality for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. But, as we’ve explained before, the study has limitations — and it stands in contrast to multiple randomized controlled trials that have found the drug is not beneficial to hospitalized patients (and two other observational studies).

During the press conference, Immanuel also claimed that a 2005 study “said it works.”

That study — which found that “[c]hloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS-CoV in cell culture” — “is no evidence at all that it’s a cure for COVID,” Schluger said.

“That was a different coronavirus; that was the coronavirus that causes SARS,” he said. Secondly, he said, the study involved cells in test tubes. Potential drugs are evaluated in test tubes, then in animals, before they move into the three phases of clinical human trials, he said — and 90% of drug candidates that make it to human trials fail because they aren’t effective or aren’t safe.

A study in a test tube involving a different virus, Schluger added, is “not how the FDA approves drugs.”

Multiple tests have shown that Hydroxychloroquine simply doesn't work.

This article you cited is not peer-reviewed, I would not trust it. Plus it only states "hydroxychloroquine may play a role in therapeutic management for COVID-19." Not only does it not definitively state whether or not hydroxychloroquine is even effective, it certainly doesn't call hydroxychloroquine a "cure".

And this article is from the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, a conservative non-profit. They also claim that HIV does not cause AIDS, that being gay reduces life expectancy, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. Not a good resource either.

So, yes, you are correct that these doctors are being censored, but that's for good reason. It's because they're wrong. It has been proven multiple times that hydroxychloroquine is not a cure, to suggest otherwise is simply wrong and dangerous.

Pretty much this.

 

[SG854]

Here's a pretty long excerpt from this article:

Spoiler: Excerpt

Amid growing evidence the drug is not effective, the FDA announced in June that it had revoked the EUA for the drugs because they are “unlikely to be effective in treating COVID-19 for the authorized uses in the EUA,” and that the “known and potential benefits” of the drugs “no longer outweigh” the risks — which can include “serious cardiac adverse events and other potential serious side effects.”

A large randomized controlled study called RECOVERY, in the U.K., reported in a preprint, which hasn’t been peer-reviewed, that hydroxychloroquine wasn’t associated with reduced mortality — and was actually associated with “an increased length of hospital stay and increased risk of progressing to invasive mechanical ventilation or death.” The study said that 26.8% of the 1,561 patients given hydroxychloroquine died within 28 days, whereas 25% of patients given usual care died in that time span — a difference that was not statistically significant.

The authors wrote that “these results indicate that hydroxychloroquine is not an effective treatment for patients hospitalized with COVID-19.”

Another study published July 16 in the Annals of Internal Medicine — a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial that involved more than 400 participants — found that “

ydroxychloroquine did not substantially reduce symptom severity in outpatients with early, mild COVID-19.”

There was one observational study by the Henry Ford Health System, published in the International Journal of Infectious Diseases on July 1, that found hydroxychloroquine was associated with lower mortality for patients hospitalized with COVID-19. But, as we’ve explained before, the study has limitations — and it stands in contrast to multiple randomized controlled trials that have found the drug is not beneficial to hospitalized patients (and two other observational studies).

During the press conference, Immanuel also claimed that a 2005 study “said it works.”

That study — which found that “[c]hloroquine is effective in preventing the spread of SARS-CoV in cell culture” — “is no evidence at all that it’s a cure for COVID,” Schluger said.

“That was a different coronavirus; that was the coronavirus that causes SARS,” he said. Secondly, he said, the study involved cells in test tubes. Potential drugs are evaluated in test tubes, then in animals, before they move into the three phases of clinical human trials, he said — and 90% of drug candidates that make it to human trials fail because they aren’t effective or aren’t safe.

A study in a test tube involving a different virus, Schluger added, is “not how the FDA approves drugs.”

Multiple tests have shown that Hydroxychloroquine simply doesn't work.

This article you cited is not peer-reviewed, I would not trust it. Plus it only states "hydroxychloroquine may play a role in therapeutic management for COVID-19." Not only does it not definitively state whether or not hydroxychloroquine is even effective, it certainly doesn't call hydroxychloroquine a "cure".

And this article is from the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, a conservative non-profit. They also claim that HIV does not cause AIDS, that being gay reduces life expectancy, that there is a link between abortion and breast cancer, and that there is a causal relationship between vaccines and autism. Not a good resource either.

So, yes, you are correct that these doctors are being censored, but that's for good reason. It's because they're wrong. It has been proven multiple times that hydroxychloroquine is not a cure, to suggest otherwise is simply wrong and dangerous.

What about the LA Doctor that used it but had success rates? Or the Doctors in the video that used it that also had success rates?

 

[Seliph]

What about the LA Doctor that used it but had success rates? Or the Doctors in the video that used it that also had success rates?

There is no way you read any part of the article I just posted considering how quickly you responded. Go back and read it. Those doctors you mentioned are liars.

 

[SG854]

@Seliph What it used in conjunction with Zinc?
What were the dose amounts?

 

[Deleted member 507653]

If this is true I can see why Trump pulled out of the World Health Orginization.

I smell conspiracy.

Just to be transparent, I just like to read about conspiracies, I don't really believe in it. Sorry if it was misleading :V

 

[Viri]

If this is true I can see why Trump pulled out of the World Health Orginization.

I smell conspiracy.

Here is a funny post from the WHO that surely aged well.

Spoiler

https://twitter.com/who/status/1217043229427761152?lang=en

If only they listened to the "other China". The one that keeps getting blacklisted.

 

[Seliph]

@Seliph What it used in conjunction with Zinc?
What were the dose amounts?

Read the article dummy

 

[SG854]

There is no way you read any part of the article I just posted considering how quickly you responded. Go back and read it. Those doctors you mentioned are liars.

The comment @Viri just posted really shows that the WHO doesn't get all its information right either.

WHO
"Preliminary investigations conducted by the Chinese authorities have found no clear evidence of human-to-human transmission of the novel coronavirus"

We know that is 100% wrong now.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Read the article dummy

Since you read it tell me. Show me that you understand it. Inform me.

Its a simple yes or no question. Did they use zinc? Did they prescribe high doses?

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

@Seliph From there I can read the article myself to see if you got the information from it correctly.

As the doctor said zinc needs to be used in conjunction with Hydroxychloroquine. If the study didn't take this into account then its a flawed study.

I really think you pulled out of your ass that they are liars without knowing anything about the doctors. You probably don't even know their history and just accused them. Its not really good faith argument.

 

[Deleted member 507653]

Here's a pretty long excerpt from this article that you should read:

Spoiler: Excerpt

This article you cited is not peer-reviewed, I would not trust it. Plus it only states "hydroxychloroquine may play a role in therapeutic management for COVID-19." Not only does it not definitively state whether or not hydroxychloroquine is even effective, it certainly doesn't call hydroxychloroquine a "cure".

To be fair, the article literally was just a summary of hospital records. It's likely they'll pass through peer review.

LA Doctor says that prescribing Hydroxychloroquine in Conjuction with Zinc says that all his patients were symptoms free within 8 to 12 hours. But it needs to be used with Zinc to be effective. This was posted 3 months ago on ABC News.




Another article saying countries that use Hydroxychloroquine have lower fatality rate then countries that don't, Association of American Physicians and Surgeons say.


https://techstartups.com/2020/07/23...ssociation-american-physicians-surgeons-says/


Also a separate study also shows success with Hydroxychloroquine and Zinc.


https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.02.20080036v1

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

It really seems like the reason why media is pushing hard against Hydroxychloroquine is because Trump supports it and recommends it based on medical advice. Lots of political bickering and tribe mentality. People are choosing politics over other peoples lives.

It also seems like the studies that say its ineffective are flawed. They prescribed too much which can be dangerous. Or didn't prescribe at the right time. But there has been effective successful use when used right.

I finally finished going through these links (I'm a slow reader). A lot of your sources have conflicts of interest, which is not really a great thing when you're trying to get objectivity. I think unfortunately in today's world, you can really find support for anything you want to believe in. The question is, when there are way more articles debunking than there are supporting hydroxychloroquine, why do you feel like there is some kind conspiracy?

 

[aerios169]

I am doctor and the cure is false, cloroquine isnt true, the study that said that was with 10 patiens and they was followed for 14 Days. There was not diference beweent in not use it and use it abrir the time that Took to recovery of the disease. In other words it dosent help to covid sickness also there are alot of adverse efects secondary to use it.

please belive only the words that said your medical carer. There are alot of miss information. I had to atent a child who drank acid because some one told that it can erradicate the virus

 

[SG854]

To be fair, the article literally was just a summary of hospital records. It's likely they'll pass through peer review.



I finally finished going through these links (I'm a slow reader). A lot of your sources have conflicts of interest, which is not really a great thing when you're trying to get objectivity. I think unfortunately in today's world, you can really find support for anything you want to believe in. The question is, when there are way more articles debunking than there are supporting hydroxychloroquine, why do you feel like there is some kind conspiracy?

I only feel it's a conspiracy if its true. If it's not true then it's not a conspiracy.

What studies did you look at that disprove it? Did they use the things I mentioned?

There's so many factors at play here.

People can accuse the doctors of being fake doctors. But then who can you trust? They say to listen to doctors and im listening. And two different groups give conflicting information.

 

[Seliph]

Since you read it tell me. Show me that you understand it. Inform me.

Its a simple yes or no question. Did they use zinc? Did they prescribe high doses?

So again I direct towards the article I cited. Please read it, I know you're literate so please take 5 minutes of your time and read it.

I'm not sure why you're so fixated on zinc either as if using zinc (which yes, all of the tests do use zinc) changes the fact that your "doctors" are simply lying to your face.

So if by "they" you mean the people who have conducted these experiments, yes "they" use zinc. In what I've found, doses vary depending on the test, though most experiments yield the same result: nothing.

Please read the article. It is fully sourced and literally debunks everything you've said.

 

[SG854]

J

 

[Deleted member 507653]

So if by "they" you mean the people who have conducted these experiments, yes "they" use zinc. In what I've found, doses vary depending on the test, though most experiments yield the same result: nothing.

Please read the article. It is fully sourced and literally debunks everything you've said.

Again, to be fair, like the first one i clicked on didnt have zinc

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I only feel it's a conspiracy if its true. If it's not true then it's not a conspiracy.

What studies did you look at that disprove it? Did they use the things I mentioned?

There's so many factors at play here.

People can accuse the doctors of being fake doctors. But then who can you trust? They say to listen to doctors and im listening. And two different groups give conflicting information.

Well, both the WHO and FDA website were convincing for me.
(https://www.who.int/news-room/detai...pinavir-ritonavir-treatment-arms-for-covid-19
https://www.fda.gov/drugs/drug-safe...oroquine-covid-19-outside-hospital-setting-or)

My understanding is that while it's possible that hydroxy can help, the risks and health dangers far outweigh the benefits. It's best to look for more treatments.

I agree that the information out there is confusing. But I think what people dislike is how some doctors seem to have conflicts of interest. For example, if they're part of an organization that has said false information before (like the hiv and aids thing) then people are more likely to distrust them. Whereas WHO and FDA are more neutral players. I think what it comes down to is its much easier to fall for a lie that you think is a "secret" versus the boring reality.