Yale University Epidemiologist Publishes Paper on Major Benefits of Hydroxchloroquine for High-risk Outpatients. Quacksalvers like Fauci should put lives ahead of Politics

[BLA + 1,666]

Early Outpatient Treatment of Symptomatic, High-Risk Covid-19 Patients that Should be Ramped-Up Immediately as Key to the Pandemic Crisis 

Dr. Harvey A. Risch

Published May 27, 2020

DEPARTMENT OF  CHRONIC DISEASE EPIDEMIOLOGY , YALE SCHOOL OF PUBLIC HEALTH. 

https://academic.oup.com/aje/advance-article/doi/10.1093/aje/kwaa093/5847586

"Evidence about use of hydroxychloroquine alone, or of hydroxychloroquine+azithromycin in inpatients, is irrelevant concerning efficacy of the pair in early high-risk outpatient disease. Five studies, including two controlled clinical trials, have demonstrated significant major outpatient treatment efficacy."

HCQ administered and monitored by a doctor is extremely safe.  One has to monitor the patients electrolytes.

Time for the Charlatans in the FDA, NIH, CDC, CNN and Democratic Party need to desist with the Hate Trump mentality and  put working to save lives ahead of political power grabs. 

It's sad state of affairs we find our country in.  Very sad. 

U.S. Congress looks more like a Jerry Springer TV show than a governing legislative body with Statesman and Stateswomen. Just waiting for the fist fights to begin then Majority Leader Pelosi (D) throwing a chair at Rep McCarthy (R) in true Jerry Springer TV form. Statesmanship, Respect and Civility is nowhere to be found in the House of Representative, never to return.  

Let me ask the FDA, CDC, W.H.O. if  Hydroxychloroquine is so dangerous and can cause death shouldn't you take it off the market in the U.S. or at least issue a warning for use in treating Malaria, Lupus, and Rheumatoid Arthritis ?  HCQ is even approved by the FDA for pregnant women.

                                 _____________

 

ADDENDUM #1  5/30/20: Attached is a post by contributor ORO @oro in response to a HCQ naysayer. He summarizes the point of Dr. Risch's paper in a concise and thorough manner.  I think it's important to add here.

"The whole 2nd point of Dr. Risch's paper is that there is no such risk. The arrhythmias are not associated with increased mortality beyond the effects of chance in a sample of >300k patients

The treatment doses for rheumatic conditions and CV19 both reach the same final blood serum levels. The rhuematic treatment does so slowly, the CV19 does it more rapidly.

The constant attempts of the officialdom of the medical establishment to shoot down the one known treatment to save lives is an indication of political pressure to maintain crisis conditions and commercial interests of the 180 companies working on vaccines and treatments for a redundant purpose. These are despicable people working against their medical oaths. Why do you constantly adhere to their malicious nonsense? "

                                 _______________

 

ADDENDUM #2  5/30/20: Doctors lining up to condemn political W.H.O. for halting HCQ trials based on an extremely flawed study published in Lancet.

Guardian article on Lancet paper and the seriously question the integrity of the alleged database from Dr. Desai's Surgisphere Corp.  Dr.Desai previously worked for NCH and reportedly resigned in February.  NCH would not discuss Dr Desai's departure.   Dr. Desai's promotes several Surgisphere products including a Covid-19 diagnostic kit which is sold on Amazon. 

Dr. Desai's Surgisphere Corp will not or can not verify the accuracy of the database or the source of the database.  Several Austrailian Hospitals Dr.Desai mentioned as a source have denied ever talking to him.  

https://www.the-scientist.com/news-opinion/disputed-hydroxychloroquine-study-brings-scrutiny-to-surgisphere-67595

Dr. Kaur continues trial

https://mobile.twitter.com/dockaurG/status/1265653536127422464

Doctor Vliet

"Waiting until you are in the ICU is like installing home locks and alarm system after burglars have invaded, vandalized your home, and stolen all your valuables,” Vliet added.

 

 

Edited June 2, 2020 by BLA

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

2 hours ago, BLA said:

U.S. Congress looks more like a Jerry Springer TV show than a governing legislative body with Statesman and Stateswomen. 

Let me ask the FDA, CDC, W.H.O. if  Hydroxychloroquine is so dangerous and can cause death shouldn't you take it off the market or at least issue a warning for use in treating Malaria, Lupus, and Rheumatoid Arthritis ?  HCQ is even approved by the FDA for pregnant women.

 

As apposed to reality TV?

That is a very silly argument.  Many medicines are very dangerous; it is a balance between risk and benefit.   

 

 

 

[BLA + 1,666]

20 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

As apposed to reality TV?

That is a very silly argument.  Many medicines are very dangerous; it is a balance between risk and benefit.   

 

 

 

So you are saying that one should risk fatal heart failure and use Hydroxychloroquine for arthritis , when you can take a myriad of other arthritic prescriptions. 

Or

If you are a pregnant women you should risk your and your baby's lives because the FDA NOW says HCQ is very dangerous and rather than reversing their former approval of HCQ for pregnant women the FDA should let Pregnant women risk mother and child life.  

It's alright for pregnant women to take HCQ according to the FDA, but Trump is risking his life taking the therapy according to the FDA and Nancy Pelosi amongst others.

Or 

If you are High Risk outpatient showing initial  Covid symptoms you should not take HCQ with only a 0.9/100,000 chance of adverse heart condition.Rather you recommend these high risk individuals be infirmed as an inpatient where those that are put on a ventilator have a 90% chance of dying.  

I don't follow your logic.

Hillary lost .  GET OVER IT.  It's been 3 1/2 years.  Dump on Trump all you want.  I do.  Just don't risk Covid patient lives for political power.  

Thats Shameful. 

 

Edited May 30, 2020 by BLA

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

12 minutes ago, BLA said:

So you are saying that one should risk fatal heat failure and use Hydroxychloroquine for arthritis , when you can take a myriad of other arthritic prescriptions. 

Or

If you are a pregnant women risk your and your baby's lives because the FDA NOW says HCQ is very dangerous. 

Or 

If you are High Risk outpatient showing initial  Covid symptoms with 0.9/100,000 chance of a heart attack you should rather be informed as an in patient where those that go on a ventilator have a 90% chance of dying.  

I don't follow your logic.

Hilary lost .  GET OVER IT.  It's been 3 1/2 years.  Dump on Trump all you want.  I do.  Just don't risk Covid patient lives for political power.  Shameful. 

 

I said none of that, read what I wrote not your preconceived notions.

I don't even live in the US and never cared about Hilary, personally I wanted Sanders. Yes, I don't like trump.

 

My point was that medicines can be dangerous.  This paper says they need electrolyte monitoring,  that means frequent blood tests, almost certainly regular ECGs. This stuff is far more dangerous than over-the-counter drugs which themselves kill plenty of people.  Look at how many people die from acetaminophen (Tylenol) each year.

Handing out HCQ like candy is likely to kill more than it saves if the virus is so mild as many people here are convinced.   Risk versus reward...

Edited May 29, 2020 by Enthalpic

[BLA + 1,666]

24 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

As apposed to reality TV?

That is a very silly argument.  Many medicines are very dangerous; it is a balance between risk and benefit.   

 

 

 

"As apposed to reality TV?"

Can you believe Hillary lost the Presidency to a Reality TV personality ?

[BLA + 1,666]

3 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

 

.  .  .  .  .  .  personally I wanted Sanders. Yes, I don't like trump.

Handing out HCQ like candy is likely to kill more than it saves if the virus is so mild as many people here are convinced.   Risk versus reward...

"Handing out like candy"?

Nobody condones that .

 It's to be prescribed by and with doctor supervision.  Monitoring the patients electrolytes and heart are important.  We are losing 10,000 patients a week world wide now.  HCQ could reduce that number substantially. 

 

Edited May 29, 2020 by BLA

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

10 minutes ago, BLA said:

Like candy ? Nobody condones that .

 It's to be prescribed by and with doctor supervision.  Monitoring the patients electrolytes and heart are important.  We are losing 10,000 patients a week now.  HCQ could reduce that number substantially. 

 

Fair enough.  I have no problem with responsible usage.  I don't like it when people overestimate its effectiveness or safety for political purposes.

 

Many here don't believe the 10,000/week number, yet, for some reason think they need HCQ...  Why do you need PPE and HCQ if the virus is some conspiracy?

Edited May 29, 2020 by Enthalpic

[BLA + 1,666]

22 minutes ago, Enthalpic said:

.  .  .  .  .  

Handing out HCQ like candy is likely to kill more than it saves if the virus is so mild as many people here are convinced.   Risk versus reward...

It is mild for 90% of the population

Read  Dr. Harvey A. Risch paper  .  .  

Read my comments .  .  .  .. 

Take note of the words " for high risk outpatients" at early signs of symptoms.

[0R0 + 6,251]

10 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

I said none of that, read what I wrote not your preconceived notions.

I don't even live in the US and never cared about Hilary, personally I wanted Sanders. Yes, I don't like trump.

 

My point was that medicines can be dangerous.  This paper says they need electrolyte monitoring,  that means frequent blood tests, almost certainly regular ECGs. This stuff is far more dangerous than over-the-counter drugs which themselves kill plenty of people.  Look at how many people die from acetaminophen (Tylenol) each year.

Handing out HCQ like candy is likely to kill more than it saves if the virus is so mild as many people here are convinced.   Risk versus reward...

The whole 2nd point of Dr. Risch's paper is that there is no such risk. The arrhythmias are not associated with increased mortality beyond the effects of chance in a sample of >300k patients

The treatment doses for rheumatic conditions and CV19 both reach the same final blood serum levels. The rhuematic treatment does so slowly, the CV19 does it more rapidly.

The constant attempts of the officialdom of the medical establishment to shoot down the one known treatment to save lives is an indication of political pressure to maintain crisis conditions and commercial interests of the 180 companies working on vaccines and treatments for a redundant purpose. These are despicable people working against their medical oaths. Why do you constantly adhere to their malicious nonsense?

 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

13 hours ago, BLA said:

"As apposed to reality TV?"

Can you believe Hillary lost the Presidency to a Reality TV personality ?

She actually lost to a businessman...

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

BLA is after Enthalpic's goat, Douglas.  And Enthalpic doesn't like to give up his goat, as you can imagine.  Bless his little heart.

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

15 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

Handing out HCQ like candy is likely to kill more than it saves if the virus is so mild as many people here are convinced.   Risk versus reward...

Poppycock, you are inventing garbage again.  AGAIN.  

Nobody is handing out HCQ like candy.

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

I think I found HCQ in my Skittles...

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

5 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I think I found HCQ in my Skittles...

I'm going out to buy some Skittles now.  Chat later....

[SERWIN + 749]

4 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Poppycock, you are inventing garbage again.  AGAIN.  

Nobody is handing out HCQ like candy.

Thats him though, always on the dark side. What if.....

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

5 hours ago, Tom Kirkman said:

Poppycock, you are inventing garbage again.  AGAIN.  

Nobody is handing out HCQ like candy.

Read the whole thread, I wrote I have no problem with responsible usage.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

11 hours ago, 0R0 said:

The whole 2nd point of Dr. Risch's paper is that there is no such risk. The arrhythmias are not associated with increased mortality beyond the effects of chance in a sample of >300k patients

The treatment doses for rheumatic conditions and CV19 both reach the same final blood serum levels. The rhuematic treatment does so slowly, the CV19 does it more rapidly.

The constant attempts of the officialdom of the medical establishment to shoot down the one known treatment to save lives is an indication of political pressure to maintain crisis conditions and commercial interests of the 180 companies working on vaccines and treatments for a redundant purpose. These are despicable people working against their medical oaths. Why do you constantly adhere to their malicious nonsense?

 

I looked up the HCQ half life, it takes a very long time to reach effective concentrations so it needs this faster ramp rate.  Do not cite any safety data that used old Rx guidelines to demonstrate safety of an alternate dosing schedule (the dose makes the poison).  The ramp-on / ramp-off is very important part of the safety of many drugs even with the same maximum serum concentrations.  Even the I.V. push rate / time-release of a single dose can play a big difference in the safety profile / side effects.

The paper says you need to do monitoring that in itself admits there is serious safety concerns.

 

I already have wrote repeatedly, in multiple threads, that I have no problem with responsible usage of HCQ.   I also said I would take it personally if it were prescribed (but not as a prophylactic).

My issue, once again, is exaggerating the benefits and downplaying the risks.  

 

You understand that pro-HCQ camp is VERY politically motivated, correct?  If trump disciples can convince everyone this stuff is a highly-safe miracle drug they can justify ignoring the current situation.

 

Edited May 30, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

On 5/29/2020 at 10:55 AM, BLA said:

 in response to a HCQ naysayer.

 

 

I am not a naysayer.   I never said anywhere not to use it; I just say use it responsibly and don't make it out to be something it is not (a miracle).

[Eyes Wide Open + 3,555]

1 hour ago, Enthalpic said:

I am not a naysayer.   I never said anywhere not to use it; I just say use it responsibly and don't make it out to be something it is not (a miracle).

It never was presented as a miracle nor a cure. What do we have to lose was stated. From there it became a political weapon...and lost its meaningful application as a intervention therapy.

The message of no hope vs hope. 

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

14 hours ago, 0R0 said:

The whole 2nd point of Dr. Risch's paper is that there is no such risk. The arrhythmias are not associated with increased mortality beyond the effects of chance in a sample of >300k patients

The ending of the abstract reads:

"cardiac arrhythmias attributable to the medications 47/100,000 users, of which estimated mortality is <20%, 9/100,000 users, compared to the 10,000 Americans now dying each week. "

 

That's 9 out of 100,000 people dead from the drug alone  (38 survive the event).

Risk versus reward.  He is saying 9 dead per 100,000 treated is OK if it cuts down on the 10,000/week. 

If you give it to all cases:

9/100,000 (1,809,885 cases ) = 163 deaths from the drug alone, not bad.

 

If you give it to all adults:

9/100,000 (209,128,094  adults) = 18,822 deaths from the drug if wildly used as a prophylactic.  Hence Rx only.

Of course you like what this guy says about the drug, but don't accept his 10,000/week number.  Is he part of the conspiracy or not? Hmmm... Do you accept his risk:reward analysis if you don't think he understands the risks?

 

Edited May 30, 2020 by Enthalpic

[0R0 + 6,251]

3 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

The ending of the abstract reads:

"cardiac arrhythmias attributable to the medications 47/100,000 users, of which estimated mortality is <20%, 9/100,000 users, compared to the 10,000 Americans now dying each week. "

 

That's 9 out of 100,000 people dead from the drug alone  (38 survive the event).

Risk versus reward.  He is saying 9 dead per 100,000 treated is OK if it cuts down on the 10,000/week. 

If you give it to all cases:

9/100,000 (1,809,885 cases ) = 163 deaths from the drug alone, not bad.

 

If you give it to all adults:

9/100,000 (209,128,094  adults) = 18,822 deaths from the drug if wildly used as a prophylactic.  Hence Rx only.

Of course you like what this guy says about the drug, but don't accept his 10,000/week number.  Is he part of the conspiracy or not? Hmmm... Do you accept his risk:reward analysis if you don't think he understands the risks?

 

Why are you giving it to all adults? Some doctor you would make.

Straw man argument. The protocol is to give it to symptomatic patients in the high risk group by age or comorbidities..

You have a 25% of getting cancer in your lifetime, would you start on chemo and radiation now in order to prevent it?

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

1 hour ago, 0R0 said:

Why are you giving it to all adults? Some doctor you would make.

Straw man argument. The protocol is to give it to symptomatic patients in the high risk group by age or comorbidities..

You have a 25% of getting cancer in your lifetime, would you start on chemo and radiation now in order to prevent it?

I said "if you give" but I knew you would call that out.  This forum fails to understand thought experiments; just because I mention something does not mean I support it.  Food for thought.

No, I won't take drugs for a disease I don't have, I mentioned somewhere above I would not take HCQ as a prophylactic.  Trump will take HCQ, and probably an antibiotic, for an infection he does not have.

Honestly, if its effectiveness is better demonstrated I could see giving almost everyone a dose upon admission if they demonstrate COVID symptoms.   Zinc is probably the key and is very, very safe and should be taken by everyone - hell add it to the water. 

 

Edited May 31, 2020 by Enthalpic

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

@0R0 perhaps respond? 

"you like what this guy says about the drug, but don't accept his 10,000/week number.  Is he part of the conspiracy or not? Hmmm... Do you accept his risk:reward analysis if you don't think he understands the risks?"

 

You seem to think he is smart when it comes to the drugs but is way off on the virus.    Is he smart or dumb?  Or just you are much smarter?

 

You can't do a proper risk versus reward analysis without accepting the risk portions (from the drug and disease) - especially for a disease that is generally often mild and self-resolving.

With rare exceptions diagnosed cancer is not self-resolving...

[0R0 + 6,251]

2 hours ago, Enthalpic said:

@0R0 perhaps respond? 

"you like what this guy says about the drug, but don't accept his 10,000/week number.  Is he part of the conspiracy or not? Hmmm... Do you accept his risk:reward analysis if you don't think he understands the risks?"

 

You seem to think he is smart when it comes to the drugs but is way off on the virus.    Is he smart or dumb?  Or just you are much smarter?

 

You can't do a proper risk versus reward analysis without accepting the risk portions (from the drug and disease) - especially for a disease that is generally often mild and self-resolving.

With rare exceptions diagnosed cancer is not self-resolving...

Those are the published numbers he can respond to. I can say that they are likely at least 25% lower, I can't say with certainty how low, I just have a lower bound. The difference is immaterial to the argument, the order of magnitude between them are too big for the exact number of CV19 deaths to matter.

[Enthalpic + 1,496]

2 hours ago, 0R0 said:

The difference is immaterial to the argument, the order of magnitude between them are too big for the exact number of CV19 deaths to matter.

[]

at least 25% lower

 

Yes! We can agree, there are some drug risks but the virus kills far more - perhaps try some medicines. 

This is far different ideology / presentation from "what do we have to lose?"  as if HCQ was harmless. 

Responsible usage accepts there is potentially something to lose.

 

-25% from the published numbers is progress.  @Ward Smith still thinks they are about -80%.

Edited May 31, 2020 by Enthalpic