A government-funded analysis found hydroxychloroquine ineffective for COVID-19, increases risk of death

[Ernst Reim + 33]

This is not a reported study. This is a doctor commenting in a newspaper about a study he has heard of:

"To assess the possible correlations between chronic patients and Covid19, SIR interrogated 1,200 rheumatologists throughout Italy to collect statistics on infections. Out of an audience of 65,000 chronic patients (Lupus and Rheumatoid Arthritis), 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."

If this turns out to be correct that would - even retroactively - indicate a very high relevance for the prophylactic effect of HCQ. You will forgive me, however, that in a world where former Nobel prize winners claim in podcasts that the coronavirus was genengineered from the AIDS virus, I will wait until I actually see the actually study, before I believe what a reporter said a doctor said a society had found when they asked their members. Again, regardless whether this is true or not, "Jim said that Paul said" is not evidence.

And please, the article was written in Italian, not "spaghetti".

Edit: the hemoglobin attack mechanism is currently debated. Again, this is based on a not-peer reviewed study and several experts disgree with the ability of a virus to pull iron out of heme. That is far from easy. As I said, one of the current proposals of viral action, but not established fact.

Edited April 30, 2020 by Ernst Reim

[0R0 + 6,251]

2 hours ago, Ernst Reim said:

And last but not least : Five or six of the whole bunch are Raoult papers. That guy is not without reason attacked in the medical community for its shoddy methodology. I commented somewhere else on the feeble evidence in the Raoult studies. It is a non-blinded, non-randomized study which nevertheless saw a 0.5% fatality rate and another 1.5% still hospitalized with unknown outcome. This is just plain not enough of a difference to standard-of-care for a non-blinded, non-randomized study.

 

The medical community is hanging on to piddly issues and not relating to the scientific results of the research. It is like checking for crossed "t" and dotted "i" but not reading any of the content. The results are clear, the control groups did not have to be randomized, the viral levels which are the output of the trial are hardly going to be affected by blind and randomized conditions. For a definitive medical trial you would want that, but that is a nit picking criticism as this trial was not about a cure for the disease, but about killing the virus. Medicine requires bludgeon to the head proof because doctors rarely know enough about the science to understand that aspect. 

Compared to the standard treatment (i,e, nothing directed at the disease) mortality is 5% of "confirmed cases" by @RSD's quoted number and hospitalizations are about 15%. How is that not a clear improvement?

How is it that the viral count reduction compared to non treatment is somehow not the main goal of this treatment and not deserving of a single comment?

Killing off the virus 2 weeks earlier than untreated recovered patients is "feeble evidence"?

Can you actually reason? 

[Strangelovesurfing + 737]

10 hours ago, ronwagn said:

Nobody with any knowledge base was unaware that social distancing would be a huge factor. I brought that up early on. People talk about NYC but it is part of a megalopolis including parts of New Jersey and all of Philadelphia. Boston and some other cities are also nearby. 

NYC and New York State were the least prepared and latest in responding to the pandemic despite the fact they should have known how vulnerable they were. The media has not covered that fact at all. Instead they blame the Federal government and then do not use the massive hospital ship, or field hospitals given them! They ignorantly claimed a need for ventilators that they did not need and probably did more harm than good with those they had. Their response was a dark comedy of errors. 

The hospital ship was always supposed to be for virus free patients.

[0R0 + 6,251]

17 minutes ago, Ernst Reim said:

This is not a reported study. This is a doctor commenting in a newspaper about a study he has heard of:

"To assess the possible correlations between chronic patients and Covid19, SIR interrogated 1,200 rheumatologists throughout Italy to collect statistics on infections. Out of an audience of 65,000 chronic patients (Lupus and Rheumatoid Arthritis), 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."

If this turns out to be correct that would - even retroactively - indicate a very high relevance for the prophylactic effect of HCQ. You will forgive me, however, that in a world where former Nobel prize winners claim in podcasts that the coronavirus was genengineered from the AIDS virus, I will wait until I actually see the actually study, before I believe what a reporter said a doctor said a society had found when they asked their members. Again, regardless whether this is true or not, "Jim said that Paul said" is not evidence.

And please, the article was written in Italian, not "spaghetti".

Edit: the hemoglobin attack mechanism is currently debated. Again, this is based on a not-peer reviewed study and several experts disgree with the ability of a virus to pull iron out of heme. That is far from easy. As I said, one of the current proposals of viral action, but not established fact.

In order to satisfy your doubts, we must wait and NOT TREAT and let people die, keep closed an economy that can be entirely back to normal at a cost of $4 Trillion a month? I suggest you value your doubts far more than anyone should.

Use the nominal evidence you have. Not your unsubstantiated doubts. NOBODY has to prove anything to you in order to apply what has been learned so far. 

People like you should not be involved in a world of uncertainty. You must prefer being in solitary confinement served by a robotic staff.

[0R0 + 6,251]

Just now, Strangelovesurfing said:

The hospital ship was always supposed to be for virus free patients.

Because that was Cuomo and DiBlazio and they are Dems, They managed to act both too late and too early and bludgeoned their people's economic prospects and the future of their city.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

9 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

All true, and this is compounded by the localized sexual practices of "city folks" living in these metro regions.  The population there views itself as sexually sophisticated, and one aspect of that is the noted bias towards sexual contact with strangers.  So you have this situation of the "pick-up," or the "hook-up," where people meet at some party and proceed to bed each other.  As you might imagine, such close contact is an ideal platform for the rapid spread of infections. 

Admittedly, this gives a whole new meaning to the term "social distancing."

Snickering aside, does anyone know how this relates to the "outbreak" of AIDS back in the 80s?  I ask because that was arguably the first time I experienced mass hysteria about a disease.  I recall a lack of knowledge in government, the medical community and the scientific community, or at least that seemed to be the perception, then as now, and nobody knew what or who to trust.  And we didn't have all of these various forms of media to spread contradictory data and/or opinions.  I guess my questions are: are there similarities, then and now, to the use of information/misinformation for the manipulation of the masses?  Was there, and is there now, a political agenda at play?  (I know the simple answers, but would like to know other people's thoughts for a deeper discussion)

[Strangelovesurfing + 737]

No, it's because it's a military vessel that would have been contaminated with virus and couldn't be used for war if one breaks out. Neither ship (LA & NY) was ever going to treat viral patients they both were for treating non-corona related medical conditions if the ER's became overwhelmed. Contaminating a ship needed to treat military personnel would be stupid.

Edited April 30, 2020 by Strangelovesurfing

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

7 minutes ago, Strangelovesurfing said:

No, it's because it's a military vessel that would have been contaminated with virus and couldn't be used for war if one breaks out. Neither ship (LA & NY) was ever going to treat viral patients they both were for treating non-corona related medical conditions if the ER's became overwhelmed. Contaminating a ship needed to treat military personnel would be stupid.

I know, why do we let sick people go to hospitals?  All they do is spread their germs around. Hospitals are for otherwise healthy people with gunshot wounds dammit!

Thankfully G.I Joe is immune to everything except for lead and Bangkok whores.

[0R0 + 6,251]

43 minutes ago, Ernst Reim said:

Your insistence that anybody disagreeing with you is blind to the facts and panicked really starts to piss me off. OK, perhaps before you compare the Raoult snake-oil stuff with the Gilead trial, spend a few hours to read up what randomized and blinded trials are and why they are important. I am not ignoring evidence, because it **is not evidence**!

I do not say that HCQ cannot work. There are currently trials done on it. But Raoult's stuff is crap and anybody insisting on using this as basis for their argumentation has no leg to stand on.

 

You missed the point of his work then. He is suggesting evidence for a treatment using existing drugs and showing their ability to lower viral loads relatively fast compared with untreated patients. He concludes in two ways, 1. he thinks this is good enough to treat his patients with it, 2. somebody with the resources should be doing a randomized placebo controlled blind trial on the protocol.

Because of item 1, he can not do item 2, since that would not meet medical ethics in view of what he believes. 

If this were not a new virus with some narrow segments of society being mortally susceptible to it, certainty is a luxury, and the normal expectations can't be met in time. In the interim you use what you have and make your evaluations as to its usefulness in practice. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 hour ago, Coffeeguyzz said:

Mr. Warnick

The study is being referenced/linked all over the net with the original reporting on 'iltempo.it/salute/2020/04/28-coronavirus-ta-farmci ... 'and a whole bunch more gobbledygook. Article written by Peter D'Angelo for Il Tempo.it. (Today's Gateway Pundit site, Jim Hoft author, links it). Originally written in spaghetti, but goog translation available.

Interesting piece that describes the suspected mechanics of how the virus actually attacks the hemoglobin-carrying capacity of the red blood cells.

This has been noted umpteen times by online doctors everywhere these past few weeks but, quelle surprise, has received no mainstream attention.

The Il Tempo piece describes -  in the last paragraph -  how 1,200 Italian rheumatologists were surveyed concerning their collective 65,000 patients who were all taking HCQ.

Of this 65,000 cohort, 20 were found to have been infected. None in ICU. No fatalities.

Okay.  That's all very nice, and it is what sparked my interest.  But you could have just done this:

Coronavirus, revealed how it works: that's why hydroxychloroquine could work, by Peter D'Angelo

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

6 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

A link to the document and the intro:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1545C_dJWMIAgqeLEsfo2U8Kq5WprDuARXrJl6N1aDjY/edit

 

Sequential CQ / HCQ Research Papers and Reports

January to April 20, 2020

Executive Summary Interpretation of the Data In This Report

The HCQ-AZ combination, when started immediately after diagnosis, appears to be a safe and efficient treatment for COVID-19, with a mortality rate of 0.5%, in elderly patients. It avoids worsening and clears virus persistence and contagious infectivity in most cases.

...

0.5% with two medications (at least) and started immediately. Meh

Have 200 old friends on facebook? One will die even with a two drug combination administered ideally...

Edited April 30, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Radha + 262]

Let us take a look at the most recent data. I think we can conclude that there is no need to be fearful. Just be cautious like we always need to be in this world.

Does isolation, sheltering in home still make sense?

"The hospitals, the ICUs are empty..they are shutting down floors.."

"When I talk to ER physicians around the country, what is happening - well because Covid has become the focus, people with heart disease, people with cancer, hypertension and various things that are critical are choosing not to come in, based on fear"

"So, what that is doing is forcing the health system to focus on Covid and not focus on a myriad of other things that are critical."

"There are a lot of secondary effects to Covid that are not being talked about"

Two months ago the response was based on fear not facts

"Typically you quarantine the sick. We have never seen where we quarantine the healthy, where you take those without disease and without symptoms and lock them in your home"

"Over the last couple of months we have gained a lot of data."

"A widespread viral infection similar to flu"

"California numbers from yesterday - [..] 12% of Californians were positive for Covid. The initial models were woefully inaccurate, they predicted millions of cases of death, not of prevalence or incidence but death. That is not materialising."

"What is materializing in the State of California is 12% positives."

"You have a 0.03 chance of dying *from* Covid19 in the state of California"

"0.03 chance of dying of Covid in the state of California. Does that necessitate sheltering in place? Does that necessitate shutting down medical systems? Does that necessitate people being out of work?"

"96% of people in California who get Covid, RECOVER with no significant continuing medical problems"

"We are sharing our own data. This is not data filtered by someone, this is our own data"

"The prevalence number goes up and the death rate stays the same and gets smaller and smaller and smaller"

"What I want you to see is millions of cases, small amount of death and you will see that in every state".

"New York State - they have been in the news a lot. Their numbers are critical."

"39% of New Yorkers tested positive for Covid19 - this is public data online" (those who were tested - 649,000 people)

"19,410 deaths - out of 19 million people. A 0.01% chance of dying from Covid19 in the state of New York. They have a 92% recovery rate".

"Millions of cases, small amount of death" (repeated)

"Is this significantly different from Influenza A and B and if not, why has our response been what it is?"

"USA. This is a big one for us. 802, 590 cases as of 22nd April 2020. We have tested over 4 million. That is double any other country, Germany is at 2 million."

"Gives us a 19.6% positive out of those who were tested for Covid 19. 64 million is a significant amount of people with Covid"

"[Numbers] are similar to the flu. If you study numbers in 2017/18 we had 50-60 million with the flu. Similar death rate."

"We always have between 37,000 and 60,000 deaths in the US, every single year. No "pandemic" talk. No shelter in place. No shutting down of businesses, no sending doctors home"

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

36 minutes ago, Radha said:

 

"The hospitals, the ICUs are empty..

"When I talk to ER physicians around the country, what is happening - well because Covid has become the focus, people with heart disease, people with cancer, hypertension and various things that are critical are choosing not to come in, based on fear"

There is some truth to that although it is not all choice.  Elective procedures are postponed, and shutdown reduces injuries and illnesses due to other causes.

Even regular clinics have reduced load - if they are open at all. I would have had my regular 6 month visit with my G.P. for a medication refill almost three months ago, but the pharmacist just does the refill now without a Dr Rx.

Edited April 30, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

4 hours ago, 0R0 said:

The infection rate in NYC is 39%.

The deaths while tested positive for CV19 are not all CV19 deaths.

The comorbidities account for well over 90% of deaths.

Meaning that the stats overstate CV19 deaths at hospital.

^ worth repeating.

There are many people who will cling to and push the panic narrative, regardless of any positive news.

Kinda like Mini Me CNN Clones.

I'm losing patience with trying to reason with those who insist on pushing a fearmongering addiction, like a drug pusher pushing fearporn crack onto others.

 

Some basic math.

Current world population is roughly 7.8 billion people.

So far, roughly 210 thousand people have died from Covid - 19 and the overall new numbers of deaths are now declining.

7.8 billion people divided by 210 thousand deaths ...

7,800,000,000 people  ÷  210,000 Covid deaths  =  STATISTICALLY INSIGNIFICANT

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

So, sunlight and fresh air helps in combating the China Flu.

So what does California plan to do?

Double down on keeping people locked up indoors, away from sunlight and fresh air.

https://twitter.com/BillFOXLA/status/1255687526272000000

 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

1 hour ago, Tom Kirkman said:

So, sunlight and fresh air helps in combating the China Flu.

So what does California plan to do?

Double down on keeping people locked up indoors, away from sunlight and fresh air.

https://twitter.com/BillFOXLA/status/1255687526272000000

 

Newsom, after seeing people challenge his "orders" and finding himself largely impotent, seems to be saying "You should have respected my authoriteye!" and digging his little hole even deeper.  Let's see how that works out.

 

[Radha + 262]

When you lost your business and income. But it's ok as the government saved your life from a virus with a survival rate of 99.99966666%   Thanks Uncle Sam

[Geoff Guenther + 317]

I don't get this thread. People present facts and back them up.  Other people deny those facts while shrieking "YOU JUST WANT TO LOCK US ALL UP!" and ignoring that civilized countries like South Korea and Japan managed the pandemic without lockdowns.

[Radha + 262]

Geoff, did you take a look at the facts I presented above. This was from a few days ago.

And then now the California governor is closing all beaches when he should be ending the lock down.

This is one reason why there are so many disturbed people. We are being treated like animals. The majority unfortunately is scared and goes along with the agenda.

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

4 minutes ago, Radha said:

And then now the California governor is closing all beaches when he should be ending the lock down.

This is one reason why there are so many disturbed people. We are being treated like animals. The majority unfortunately is scared and goes along with the agenda.

^^ Agree with this ^^

[El Gato + 254]

27 minutes ago, Geoff Guenther said:

I don't get this thread. People present facts and back them up.  Other people deny those facts while shrieking "YOU JUST WANT TO LOCK US ALL UP!" and ignoring that civilized countries like South Korea and Japan managed the pandemic without lockdowns.

They also opened their countries up much quicker than we did also, disease be damned. Especially Japan. Sweden never did lock down

[Geoff Guenther + 317]

31 minutes ago, Radha said:

Geoff, did you take a look at the facts I presented above. This was from a few days ago.

You mean "facts" like the German tests had a 50-80% false positive rate and that the ICUs are empty? It's up to you to present verified facts. At the moment you're just another sheep parroting misinformation because you're told to.

I have a hunch that a lot of the people who are fine with 300,000 - 1,000,000 Americans dying are also the ones that panicked about the caravan of migrants a couple of years back or supported Bush in over-reacting when 3,000 Americans died on 9/11.

[Dave Gilmour + 20]

What a nonsens that is being said about chloroquine.

this is the truth, and it is from a WHO REPORT from 2017!

 

”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.”

 

zero deaths ! Zero unexplained deaths ! 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

3 minutes ago, Geoff Guenther said:

You mean "facts" like the German tests had a 50-80% false positive rate and that the ICUs are empty? It's up to you to present verified facts. At the moment you're just another sheep parroting misinformation because you're told to.

I have a hunch that a lot of the people who are fine with 300,000 - 1,000,000 Americans dying are also the ones that panicked about the caravan of migrants a couple of years back or supported Bush in over-reacting when 3,000 Americans died on 9/11.

There you go again.  Who's got the "PEOPLE ARE GONNA DIE" video? 

Nobody "panicked" about any immigrant caravan.  For your specific reference to Bush, 9/11 and murdered Americans mixed with just about every other nationality on the planet, I'd wager even you and your country stood behind the U.S. at that time to find and serve justice on those responsible.  (I know, Geoff, now you'll want to hash out the entire military effort for the following 10 years.  Go ahead, Geoff.  Go ahead.)

[UNC12345 + 171]

13 hours ago, footeab@yahoo.com said:

Typical: Get called on the carpet, as your lazyness proved you wrong, and then change the subject to being called a lazy douche because you were one...

Bravo!  You get a Star sticker award!⭐

I guess we are both award winners then.  It's funny but you keep bringing up the term "lazy".  I did actually check your links so I don't think it actually applies, but if it makes you feel better to call me that, feel free.  If you have time to check each and every link posted on this forum, well...say no more.  The amount of BS being posted on here as legitimate and trustworthy sources, while simultaneously knocking the "MSM" or any other source in disagreement, is beyond reason or common sense.

Pretty sure you missed my original point, and then moved on to other attack strategies, but I'll let it go.

Edited April 30, 2020 by UNC12345