I never said at all costs. The preponderance of evidence suggests the drug doesn't work. It is not solely the responsibility of the individual to not get sick when it comes to combating a pandemic.
Your turn.
Last edited by Lacius,
-
Friendly reminder: The politics section is a place where a lot of differing opinions are raised. You may not like what you read here but it is someone's opinion. As long as the debate is respectful you are free to debate freely. Also, the views and opinions expressed by forum members may not necessarily reflect those of GBAtemp. Messages that the staff consider offensive or inflammatory may be removed in line with existing forum terms and conditions.
Is hydroxycloroquine really efficient at treating covid-19?
- Thread starter SG854
- Start date
- Views 24,836
- Replies 275
- Likes 3
Your turn.
OMGcat has been listing off alternative cures.
If you're relying on strangers to do anything, you're screwed.
not cures, treatments. medicine really doesn't have cures, as nothing is ever 100% effective. just about everyone has the potential to get fucked by this disease in some capacity. treatments are getting better and more effective, but wearing a mask, washing your hands, and avoiding people are first line defenses that keep you out of the hospital. anyone who states that a medicine is 100% effective is selling snake oil. especially if they don't talk about risks and side-effects. dexa has side effects like swlling, increased apetite, and impaired wound healing or bone thinning. on the other hand hydroxy can easily cause blindness, kidney damage, and muscle damage.
when given the choice of choosing hydroxy or dexa/thromboprophylaxis any physician worth their salt would chose the latter, it is cheaper, not in short supply, and has extremely low risk of sever side-effects. plus physicians cannot receive kick-backs for dexa/TP as they are available as generics.
Last edited by omgcat,
You just admitted that Winnie the Flu can't be cured. Meaning we've been living in fear for no reason.
Sounds like natural selection trying to get rid of the stupid but u intervened. If your dumb enough to drink acid maybe we should just let these dumb ass's go. One less idiot populating and reproducing in this world. I can 100% guarantee that injecting large amounts of bleach into your veins will prevent you from dying from covid 19. Now you will die from injecting said bleach but hey it does what i said it does and thats prevent you from dying from covid 19. If anyone is stupid enough to try it i can assure u i wont loose sleep over it and the world as a whole just got a little smarter. People are dumb. Its becoming more and more apparent.
Last edited by wartutor,
Haven't been taking much part in this one, haven't seen the point. But you seen this one yet?
https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study
Also thought this was interesting. TV show from 2003 ... the writer said he used CDC literature for research.
https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/07/hydro-treatment-study
Also thought this was interesting. TV show from 2003 ... the writer said he used CDC literature for research.
Last edited by Hanafuda,
They kinda hedge their bets a little......
https://www.henryford.com/news/2020/08/hydroxychloroquine-an-open-letter
"The most well-accepted and definitive method to determine the efficacy of a treatment is a double-blind, randomized clinical trial. However, this type of study takes a long time to design, execute and analyze. Therefore, a whole scientific field exists in which scientists examine how a drug is working in the real world to get as best an answer as they can as soon as possible. These types of studies can be done much more rapidly with data that is already available, usually from medical records.
Like all observational research, these studies are very difficult to analyze and can never completely account for the biases inherent in how doctors make different decisions to treat different patients. Furthermore, it is not unusual that results from such studies vary in different populations and at different times, and no one study can ever be considered all by itself.
Our promising Henry Ford treatment study should be considered as another important contribution to the other studies of hydroxychloroquine that describes what the authors found in our patient population. We – along with all doctors and scientists – eagerly support the need for randomized clinical trials."
What they are saying is that they can't rule out that Doctors may have chosen to give hydroxychloroquine only to people who they thought would survive, therefore it would look like it had an effect when it didn't.
This is huge. I bet the patients treated with hydroxychloroquine didn't die of from a bear attack either.
Last edited by smf,
Pattern of SARS-CoV-2 infection among dependant elderly residents living in retirement homes in Marseille, France, March-June 2020.
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Abstract-COVID-EHPAD.pdf
And I bet like many other studies have shown, if they were treated earlier, the success rate would increase. Sounds like from the results there were those that may already had been at a secondary issue stage.
Results. Elderly residents were predominantly female (64.8%) with a mean age of 83 years old. SARS-CoV-2 detection in residents (226, 13.4%) was significantly higher than in staff members (87, 8.8%), with p=4.10-4. Of 226 infected residents, 37 (16.4%) were detected on a case-by-case basis because of COVID-19 symptoms and 189 (83.6%) were detected through mass screening; 84.0% had possible COVID-19 symptoms, including respiratory symptoms and signs (48.5%) and fever (47.2%); 118 (52.2%) patients received a course of oral hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin (HCQ-AZ) for at least 3 days; and 47 (20.8%) died. In multivariate, death rate was positively associated with being male (31.5% vs. 13.4%, OR=4.33, p<10-4) and being older than 85 years (26.1% vs. 15.7%, OR=3.01, p=0.005)and negatively associated with being diagnosed through mass screening (16.9%, vs. 40.5%, OR=0.20, p<10-4) and receiving HCQ-AZ treatment for at least 3 days (14.4% vs. 27.8%, OR=0.41, p=0.017).
https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/Abstract-COVID-EHPAD.pdf
And I bet like many other studies have shown, if they were treated earlier, the success rate would increase. Sounds like from the results there were those that may already had been at a secondary issue stage.
Results. Elderly residents were predominantly female (64.8%) with a mean age of 83 years old. SARS-CoV-2 detection in residents (226, 13.4%) was significantly higher than in staff members (87, 8.8%), with p=4.10-4. Of 226 infected residents, 37 (16.4%) were detected on a case-by-case basis because of COVID-19 symptoms and 189 (83.6%) were detected through mass screening; 84.0% had possible COVID-19 symptoms, including respiratory symptoms and signs (48.5%) and fever (47.2%); 118 (52.2%) patients received a course of oral hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin (HCQ-AZ) for at least 3 days; and 47 (20.8%) died. In multivariate, death rate was positively associated with being male (31.5% vs. 13.4%, OR=4.33, p<10-4) and being older than 85 years (26.1% vs. 15.7%, OR=3.01, p=0.005)and negatively associated with being diagnosed through mass screening (16.9%, vs. 40.5%, OR=0.20, p<10-4) and receiving HCQ-AZ treatment for at least 3 days (14.4% vs. 27.8%, OR=0.41, p=0.017).
Hydroxychloroquine Safety Outcome within Approved Therapeutic Protocol for COVID-19 Outpatients in Saudi Arabia
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.16.20175752v1
Again, I think the FDA got it wrong in the USA. No other country that uses HCQ seems to reflect FDA results when they put a stop on using it here in the USA. I just really hope the FDA's finding or the data in the database they used for their recomendations is not another extent of TDS. To be fair there is so much medical malpractice/error in this country every year it could be a combination of both.
From the above study, Saudi Arabia found:
In our study, results show that the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 patients in mild to moderate cases in an outpatient setting, within the protocol recommendation and inclusion/exclusion criteria, is safe, highly tolerable, and with minimum side effects.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.08.16.20175752v1
Again, I think the FDA got it wrong in the USA. No other country that uses HCQ seems to reflect FDA results when they put a stop on using it here in the USA. I just really hope the FDA's finding or the data in the database they used for their recomendations is not another extent of TDS. To be fair there is so much medical malpractice/error in this country every year it could be a combination of both.
From the above study, Saudi Arabia found:
In our study, results show that the use of hydroxychloroquine for COVID-19 patients in mild to moderate cases in an outpatient setting, within the protocol recommendation and inclusion/exclusion criteria, is safe, highly tolerable, and with minimum side effects.
A comprehensive strategy for the early treatment of COVID-19 with azithromycin/hydroxychloroquine and/or corticosteroids: results of a retrospective observational study in the French overseas department of Reunion Island
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221371652030206X
Received 11 June 2020, Revised 22 July 2020, Accepted 1 August 2020, Available online 20 August 2020.
To appear in:Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance
Among the 10 patients admitted in ICU, hospital lengths of stay were 25 [15-35] days in the treated patients with hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin and 40 [25-55] days in the untreated patients (P=0.3).
Hydroxychloroquine is protective to the heart, not Harmful: A systematic review
Chadwick C.ProdromosMD
To appear in:New Microbes and New Infections
Received Date:24 June 2020
Revised Date:13 August 2020
Accepted Date:17 August 2020
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2052297520300998?via=ihub
Results
No Torsade de Pointes or related deaths were found to have been reported as a result of HCQ and azithromycin use in the peer reviewed literature. To the contrary HCQ/azithromycin were uniformly found to substantially reduce cardiac mortality and also to decrease thrombosis, arrhythmia and cholesterol in treated patients in recent peer reviewed studies and meeting presentations.
Conclusions
HCQ and azithromycin do not cause TDP cardiac mortality. HCQ decreases cardiac events. HCQ should not be restricted in use for COVID 19 patients because of fear of cardiac mortality.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S221371652030206X
Received 11 June 2020, Revised 22 July 2020, Accepted 1 August 2020, Available online 20 August 2020.
To appear in:Journal of Global Antimicrobial Resistance
Among the 10 patients admitted in ICU, hospital lengths of stay were 25 [15-35] days in the treated patients with hydroxychloroquine/azithromycin and 40 [25-55] days in the untreated patients (P=0.3).
Hydroxychloroquine is protective to the heart, not Harmful: A systematic review
Chadwick C.ProdromosMD
To appear in:New Microbes and New Infections
Received Date:24 June 2020
Revised Date:13 August 2020
Accepted Date:17 August 2020
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2052297520300998?via=ihub
Results
No Torsade de Pointes or related deaths were found to have been reported as a result of HCQ and azithromycin use in the peer reviewed literature. To the contrary HCQ/azithromycin were uniformly found to substantially reduce cardiac mortality and also to decrease thrombosis, arrhythmia and cholesterol in treated patients in recent peer reviewed studies and meeting presentations.
Conclusions
HCQ and azithromycin do not cause TDP cardiac mortality. HCQ decreases cardiac events. HCQ should not be restricted in use for COVID 19 patients because of fear of cardiac mortality.
Last edited by crimpshrine,
D
Deleted User
Guest
Low-dose Hydroxychloroquine Therapy and Mortality in Hospitalized Patients with COVID-19: A Nationwide Observational Study of 8075 Participants
Impact of HCQ on mortality among 8075 patients with COVID-19 was assessed
•
Lower mortality in HCQ-treated patients as compared to supportive care
•
Lower mortality is irrespective of symptoms duration
Conclusions
Compared to supportive care only, low-dose HCQ monotherapy was independently associated with lower mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 diagnosed and treated early or later after symptom onset.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
Use of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalised COVID-19 patients is associated with reduced mortality: Findings from the observational multicentre Italian CORIST study
Methods
In a retrospective observational study, 3,451 unselected patients hospitalized in 33 clinical centers in Italy, from February 19, 2020 to May 23, 2020, with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, were analyzed. The primary end-point in a time-to event analysis was in-hospital death, comparing patients who received HCQ with patients who did not. We used multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression models with inverse probability for treatment weighting by propensity scores, with the addition of subgroup analyses.
Conclusions
HCQ use was associated with a 30% lower risk of death in COVID-19 hospitalized patients. Within the limits of an observational study and awaiting results from randomized controlled trials, these data do not discourage the use of HCQ in inpatients with COVID-19.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0953620520303356
Impact of HCQ on mortality among 8075 patients with COVID-19 was assessed
•
Lower mortality in HCQ-treated patients as compared to supportive care
•
Lower mortality is irrespective of symptoms duration
Conclusions
Compared to supportive care only, low-dose HCQ monotherapy was independently associated with lower mortality in hospitalized patients with COVID-19 diagnosed and treated early or later after symptom onset.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0924857920303423
--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------
Use of hydroxychloroquine in hospitalised COVID-19 patients is associated with reduced mortality: Findings from the observational multicentre Italian CORIST study
Methods
In a retrospective observational study, 3,451 unselected patients hospitalized in 33 clinical centers in Italy, from February 19, 2020 to May 23, 2020, with laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection, were analyzed. The primary end-point in a time-to event analysis was in-hospital death, comparing patients who received HCQ with patients who did not. We used multivariable Cox proportional-hazards regression models with inverse probability for treatment weighting by propensity scores, with the addition of subgroup analyses.
Conclusions
HCQ use was associated with a 30% lower risk of death in COVID-19 hospitalized patients. Within the limits of an observational study and awaiting results from randomized controlled trials, these data do not discourage the use of HCQ in inpatients with COVID-19.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0953620520303356
Well, that didn't really help at all
Seems pretty inconclusive with a slight bias towards the positive.Well, that didn't really help at all
Not reading the chart properly? LOL
The Green side shows help (.1 - 1) , the red side does NOT. (1 - 10)
It's pretty clear it helped more than not.
In some cases, but then in other cases it was more towards the red, so it's inconclusive at best.
The slight bias towards the green might just be coincidence.
Again I think you are reading the chart wrong there is MORE positive, than negative. Which also matches ALL other public studies up to this point.
Maybe charts are not for you.
Is this any better:
What this means from this gathering of data. If you have Covid-19 and you are given HCQ there it is likely going to help in many cases. Obviously NOT all. But there is no silver bullet. All the results including this seem to show a 30% benefit or more overall.
This continues to reflect that.
And again contradicts the conclusions the US FDA came to. They messed up.
The numbers just make no sense to me, the chart was the only thing that made senseAgain I think you are reading the chart wrong there is MORE positive, than negative. Which also matches ALL other public studies up to this point.
Maybe charts are not for you.
Is this any better:
What this means from this gathering of data. If you have Covid-19 and you are given HCQ there it is likely going to help in many cases. Obviously NOT all. But there is no silver bullet. All the results including this seem to show a 30% benefit or more overall.
This continues to reflect that.
And again contradicts the conclusions the US FDA came to. They messed up.
What I mean is there are still quite a few studies that are biased towards the red. So that's what makes it inconclusive to me. It's not an universal "yes, it works"
ffs, why do you guys think injecting random shit into your veins helps. If anything the reason they feel better is because they're under constant hospital caer. I'm tired of these threads full of blatant misinformation being promoted by people who don't know how to find real case studies. Thread Blocked
Similar threads
