Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Prev Next
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [patf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patf wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
patf wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:

The people who don’t have ulterior motives who see the potential benefits from this medicine just have to quietly go about their work, I guess. They might confirm that the drug is not worthwhile. I don’t know.


But this is what is happening. Why are you trying to complicate it? The studies are not finding any significant medical benefits, only risks.

You are a lawyer, and yet you're here on the internet doubting the validity of medical studies, because...?


I’m sorry— I wasn’t clear. I don’t doubt the study. I love it. It looks like a good study.

I meant to say that we should carefully read the conclusion of this study. The conclusion is that the drug is not good for hospitalized covid patients. It’s not a broad condemnation of the drug.


I don't think this is a study at all. it is a data analysis of records. The standard we were told was needed is double blind placebo clinical trials. Those are underway and eventually we will get some answers about this drug's use at various points in the infection and as a prophylactic. This is not such a study. And as you point out at the point of time these cases were occurring, the only people being hospitalized were the very sick. At least in NJ were my son was working in and ED you did not get admitted until you were very sick. You were sent home and told to come back if you had serious symptoms like difficulty breathing. So good studies still need to be completed before we know how this drug could help.


The study looked at close to 100,000 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine both with and without simultaneous administration of azythromycin. The harm found heart rhythm disturbances with both, and with the combination of drugs those disturbances were higher. That’s not immaterial information.

The bottom line is that all the information we have so far is that hydroxychloroquine is a drug that we tried when desperate but unfortunately there appears to be no evidence it helps.

Unlike remdesivir, where there has been some benefit shown.


Do you understand that this is a review of data? hospital records, death certs, etc. I.e. not clinical study. We need to see what the properly run studies say before reaching any conclusions.

How can you ethically give it to people in a double blind study when an analysis of the data indicates it does no good and in fact kills people? If it had shown promise in an analysis of the data then you would put the time and effort into the sort of thing you are looking for. It did not. It did the opposite. When preliminary results from studies show excess people dying they shut down the study.

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [patf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
patf wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
patf wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:

The people who don’t have ulterior motives who see the potential benefits from this medicine just have to quietly go about their work, I guess. They might confirm that the drug is not worthwhile. I don’t know.


But this is what is happening. Why are you trying to complicate it? The studies are not finding any significant medical benefits, only risks.

You are a lawyer, and yet you're here on the internet doubting the validity of medical studies, because...?


I’m sorry— I wasn’t clear. I don’t doubt the study. I love it. It looks like a good study.

I meant to say that we should carefully read the conclusion of this study. The conclusion is that the drug is not good for hospitalized covid patients. It’s not a broad condemnation of the drug.


I don't think this is a study at all. it is a data analysis of records. The standard we were told was needed is double blind placebo clinical trials. Those are underway and eventually we will get some answers about this drug's use at various points in the infection and as a prophylactic. This is not such a study. And as you point out at the point of time these cases were occurring, the only people being hospitalized were the very sick. At least in NJ were my son was working in and ED you did not get admitted until you were very sick. You were sent home and told to come back if you had serious symptoms like difficulty breathing. So good studies still need to be completed before we know how this drug could help.


The study looked at close to 100,000 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine both with and without simultaneous administration of azythromycin. The harm found heart rhythm disturbances with both, and with the combination of drugs those disturbances were higher. That’s not immaterial information.

The bottom line is that all the information we have so far is that hydroxychloroquine is a drug that we tried when desperate but unfortunately there appears to be no evidence it helps.

Unlike remdesivir, where there has been some benefit shown.


Do you understand that this is a review of data? hospital records, death certs, etc. I.e. not clinical study. We need to see what the properly run studies say before reaching any conclusions.

Yes, I do. And I’ve listened to two interviews given by the lead doctor on the study. Did I say something incorrect above?
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [j p o] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
j p o wrote:
patf wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
patf wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:

The people who don’t have ulterior motives who see the potential benefits from this medicine just have to quietly go about their work, I guess. They might confirm that the drug is not worthwhile. I don’t know.


But this is what is happening. Why are you trying to complicate it? The studies are not finding any significant medical benefits, only risks.

You are a lawyer, and yet you're here on the internet doubting the validity of medical studies, because...?


I’m sorry— I wasn’t clear. I don’t doubt the study. I love it. It looks like a good study.

I meant to say that we should carefully read the conclusion of this study. The conclusion is that the drug is not good for hospitalized covid patients. It’s not a broad condemnation of the drug.


I don't think this is a study at all. it is a data analysis of records. The standard we were told was needed is double blind placebo clinical trials. Those are underway and eventually we will get some answers about this drug's use at various points in the infection and as a prophylactic. This is not such a study. And as you point out at the point of time these cases were occurring, the only people being hospitalized were the very sick. At least in NJ were my son was working in and ED you did not get admitted until you were very sick. You were sent home and told to come back if you had serious symptoms like difficulty breathing. So good studies still need to be completed before we know how this drug could help.


The study looked at close to 100,000 patients treated with hydroxychloroquine both with and without simultaneous administration of azythromycin. The harm found heart rhythm disturbances with both, and with the combination of drugs those disturbances were higher. That’s not immaterial information.

The bottom line is that all the information we have so far is that hydroxychloroquine is a drug that we tried when desperate but unfortunately there appears to be no evidence it helps.

Unlike remdesivir, where there has been some benefit shown.


Do you understand that this is a review of data? hospital records, death certs, etc. I.e. not clinical study. We need to see what the properly run studies say before reaching any conclusions.


How can you ethically give it to people in a double blind study when an analysis of the data indicates it does no good and in fact kills people? If it had shown promise in an analysis of the data then you would put the time and effort into the sort of thing you are looking for. It did not. It did the opposite. When preliminary results from studies show excess play eople dying they shut down the study.

I think some such studies are underway, so we may get results from those. But I would doubt any further studies will be started.
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Yeah, after this study it would be near impossible to get approval for further studies. And yes it is a study, and it is studies like these that provide evidence to then run full double-blind clinical trials for a secondary indication of an already-approved drug. The fact that some are running just points to how desperate things got. Time to put this one on the shelf.
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [TomkR] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It sounds like Duke University is currently doing a study on prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.

Link to discussion of Lancet article:

https://zdoggmd.com/hydroxychloroquine/
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [Calamityjane88] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Calamityjane88 wrote:
It sounds like Duke University is currently doing a study on prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.

Link to discussion of Lancet article:

https://zdoggmd.com/hydroxychloroquine/

Trump said its good, therefore people on this board automatically are against it. It wouldn't matter if the study did come back and say it may help in some cases. It wouldn't matter if it was found that is was the cure..
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
orphious wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:
It sounds like Duke University is currently doing a study on prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.

Link to discussion of Lancet article:

https://zdoggmd.com/hydroxychloroquine/


Trump said its good, therefore people on this board automatically are against it. It wouldn't matter if the study did come back and say it may help in some cases. It wouldn't matter if it was found that is was the cure..

Waaaaaaaaaaahhhh!!!

Got any evidence of what you allege?
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
orphious wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:
It sounds like Duke University is currently doing a study on prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.

Link to discussion of Lancet article:

https://zdoggmd.com/hydroxychloroquine/


Trump said its good, therefore people on this board automatically are against it. It wouldn't matter if the study did come back and say it may help in some cases. It wouldn't matter if it was found that is was the cure..

You’re too blind to see that what Trump was ridiculed for, and rightfully so, was stating a potential cure without any evidence whatsoever. Now he comes out and bSically implies it’s keeping him safe, again with no actual evidence.

If it works, great but you don’t go on TV and give people a false sense of security because you have no fucking clue what you’re doing.

_____
TEAM HD
Each day is what you make of it so make it the best day possible.
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
orphious wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:
It sounds like Duke University is currently doing a study on prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.

Link to discussion of Lancet article:

https://zdoggmd.com/hydroxychloroquine/


Trump said its good, therefore people on this board automatically are against it. It wouldn't matter if the study did come back and say it may help in some cases. It wouldn't matter if it was found that is was the cure..

No.

It is because some dumbass continuously makes statements like this with zero basis. WTF is a "program" of hydroxychloroquine?

“I believe in it enough that I took a program, because I had two people in the White House that tested positive, I figured maybe it’s a good thing to take a program,” Trump said.
“You know we take a little bit of a period of time, I think it was two weeks, but hydroxy has had tremendous, if you look at it, tremendous, rave reviews.”

I'm beginning to think that we are much more fucked than I thought.
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [TheRef65] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
TheRef65 wrote:

You’re too blind to see that what Trump was ridiculed for, and rightfully so, was stating a potential cure without any evidence whatsoever. Now he comes out and bSically implies it’s keeping him safe, again with no actual evidence.

If it works, great but you don’t go on TV and give people a false sense of security because you have no fucking clue what you’re doing.

It's literally the Jude Law character from Contagion. (a conspiracy blogger who pitches forsythia as a fake cure). Only instead of a 3rd rate blogger, it's....the President of the United States. Truth is stranger...
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [Kay Serrar] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Kay Serrar wrote:
orphious wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:
It sounds like Duke University is currently doing a study on prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.

Link to discussion of Lancet article:

https://zdoggmd.com/hydroxychloroquine/


Trump said its good, therefore people on this board automatically are against it. It wouldn't matter if the study did come back and say it may help in some cases. It wouldn't matter if it was found that is was the cure..


Waaaaaaaaaaahhhh!!!

Got any evidence of what you allege?


Sure. Posting history of you and several others. I don't think I need to cite every single anti-Trump thing posted here.
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
orphious wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
orphious wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:
It sounds like Duke University is currently doing a study on prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.

Link to discussion of Lancet article:

https://zdoggmd.com/hydroxychloroquine/


Trump said its good, therefore people on this board automatically are against it. It wouldn't matter if the study did come back and say it may help in some cases. It wouldn't matter if it was found that is was the cure..


Waaaaaaaaaaahhhh!!!

Got any evidence of what you allege?



Sure. Posting history of you and several others. I don't think I need to cite every single anti-Trump thing posted here.

We have an actual Dr. on here who is telling us that hydroxy isn't doing anything to help.

And we have a dipshit in the Whitehouse who lies about everything saying that it's getting "Rave reviews".

I know who I believe.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
orphious wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
orphious wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:
It sounds like Duke University is currently doing a study on prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.

Link to discussion of Lancet article:

https://zdoggmd.com/hydroxychloroquine/


Trump said its good, therefore people on this board automatically are against it. It wouldn't matter if the study did come back and say it may help in some cases. It wouldn't matter if it was found that is was the cure..


Waaaaaaaaaaahhhh!!!

Got any evidence of what you allege?



Sure. Posting history of you and several others. I don't think I need to cite every single anti-Trump thing posted here.

So no. Got it.

I’ve said Trump should get credit for things here in the past. Unfortunately he gives us reason to criticize just about every day. But you’re saying we would discount the findings of a scientific study. Where’s your evidence for that, because most people here, including me, are firmly behind using science to guide our views?
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
orphious wrote:
Kay Serrar wrote:
orphious wrote:
Calamityjane88 wrote:
It sounds like Duke University is currently doing a study on prophylactic use of hydroxychloroquine.

Link to discussion of Lancet article:

https://zdoggmd.com/hydroxychloroquine/


Trump said its good, therefore people on this board automatically are against it. It wouldn't matter if the study did come back and say it may help in some cases. It wouldn't matter if it was found that is was the cure..


Waaaaaaaaaaahhhh!!!

Got any evidence of what you allege?


Sure. Posting history of you and several others. I don't think I need to cite every single anti-Trump thing posted here.

you wouldn't find yourself in this position of defending trump if trump behaved like a normal person. he promoted a drug for a use against reasonable medical norms. he was rightly castigated for it. if he didn't do stupid, destructive things he wouldn't get ridiculed, and you wouldn't have to defend him, which probably makes you feel silly.

aren't you guilty of the thing you're alleging? aren't you coming to trump's, and this drug's, defense only because the criticism is coming from the the political side you don't like?

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
you wouldn't find yourself in this position of defending trump if trump behaved like a normal person. he promoted a drug for a use against reasonable medical norms. he was rightly castigated for it. if he didn't do stupid, destructive things he wouldn't get ridiculed, and you wouldn't have to defend him, which probably makes you feel silly.

aren't you guilty of the thing you're alleging? aren't you coming to trump's, and this drug's, defense only because the criticism is coming from the the political side you don't like?

No Dan, you don't understand....

Orphious doesn't like Trump. Never has! He just really really thinks that we're being unfair to the Disinfectant Injector in Chief.

How does Danny Hart sit down with balls that big?
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [BLeP] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
BLeP wrote:
Slowman wrote:

you wouldn't find yourself in this position of defending trump if trump behaved like a normal person. he promoted a drug for a use against reasonable medical norms. he was rightly castigated for it. if he didn't do stupid, destructive things he wouldn't get ridiculed, and you wouldn't have to defend him, which probably makes you feel silly.

aren't you guilty of the thing you're alleging? aren't you coming to trump's, and this drug's, defense only because the criticism is coming from the the political side you don't like?


No Dan, you don't understand....

Orphious doesn't like Trump. Never has! He just really really thinks that we're being unfair to the Disinfectant Injector in Chief.

i think this is one big problem. however bad trump gets - and it's hard to imagine anybody any worse - he still won't be quite as bad as the "other side." trump has, i'm sure (and i'm sure orphious feels it), tested the limits. but we're seeing how ardent this distaste for the other side is. trump could cancel the election, throw his opponents in jail, make billions every year personally off the presidency, muzzle the press he doesn't like, and it would certainly vex orphious. but trump would still be preferable to anyone on the other side.

Dan Empfield
aka Slowman
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [Slowman] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Slowman wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Slowman wrote:

you wouldn't find yourself in this position of defending trump if trump behaved like a normal person. he promoted a drug for a use against reasonable medical norms. he was rightly castigated for it. if he didn't do stupid, destructive things he wouldn't get ridiculed, and you wouldn't have to defend him, which probably makes you feel silly.

aren't you guilty of the thing you're alleging? aren't you coming to trump's, and this drug's, defense only because the criticism is coming from the the political side you don't like?


No Dan, you don't understand....

Orphious doesn't like Trump. Never has! He just really really thinks that we're being unfair to the Disinfectant Injector in Chief.


i think this is one big problem. however bad trump gets - and it's hard to imagine anybody any worse - he still won't be quite as bad as the "other side." trump has, i'm sure (and i'm sure orphious feels it), tested the limits. but we're seeing how ardent this distaste for the other side is. trump could cancel the election, throw his opponents in jail, make billions every year personally off the presidency, muzzle the press he doesn't like, and it would certainly vex orphious. but trump would still be preferable to anyone on the other side.

Unfortunately, for a great many of his supporters (and surely for some portion of the Left as well), that preference is based on no other reason than the side a person is on. It has nothing to do with policy, morality, beliefs, or anything substantive. The other side is bad. My side is good.

Slowguy

(insert pithy phrase here...)
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [slowguy] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
slowguy wrote:
Slowman wrote:
BLeP wrote:
Slowman wrote:

you wouldn't find yourself in this position of defending trump if trump behaved like a normal person. he promoted a drug for a use against reasonable medical norms. he was rightly castigated for it. if he didn't do stupid, destructive things he wouldn't get ridiculed, and you wouldn't have to defend him, which probably makes you feel silly.

aren't you guilty of the thing you're alleging? aren't you coming to trump's, and this drug's, defense only because the criticism is coming from the the political side you don't like?


No Dan, you don't understand....

Orphious doesn't like Trump. Never has! He just really really thinks that we're being unfair to the Disinfectant Injector in Chief.


i think this is one big problem. however bad trump gets - and it's hard to imagine anybody any worse - he still won't be quite as bad as the "other side." trump has, i'm sure (and i'm sure orphious feels it), tested the limits. but we're seeing how ardent this distaste for the other side is. trump could cancel the election, throw his opponents in jail, make billions every year personally off the presidency, muzzle the press he doesn't like, and it would certainly vex orphious. but trump would still be preferable to anyone on the other side.


Unfortunately, for a great many of his supporters (and surely for some portion of the Left as well), that preference is based on no other reason than the side a person is on. It has nothing to do with policy, morality, beliefs, or anything substantive. The other side is bad. My side is good.

Certainly when it comes to Trump, it has nothing to do with morality nor anything substantive.

In his case, both are notably absent.
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [orphious] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
WHO has suspended all hydroxychloroquine studies, citing health concerns.
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Reports of another study in the Detroit News. I've no opinion not having studied the study, would appreciate your expertise.

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [H-] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
H- wrote:
Reports of another study in the Detroit News. I've no opinion not having studied the study, would appreciate your expertise.

The study has a number of important limitations due to the fact that it was retrospective and observational rather than randomized and controlled, which means the decision to treat with either medication (or not treat at all) was made based on considerations individual to each patient. In effect, it is thus practically impossible to really compare the different treatment groups. This is very well described in an accompanying comment in the same journal where the article appeared:
"Were the decision to withhold treatment related to poor prognosis (e.g. palliative intent), it stands to reason that patients receiving neither hydroxychloroquine nor azithromycin would have the highest mortality. Indeed, the non-treated group had an overall mortality that was higher than the rate of admission to the ICU (26.4% vs. 15.2%), suggesting that many patients were not considered appropriate for critical care." (Full comment here).
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [malte] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
malte wrote:
H- wrote:
Reports of another study in the Detroit News. I've no opinion not having studied the study, would appreciate your expertise.


The study has a number of important limitations due to the fact that it was retrospective and observational rather than randomized and controlled, which means the decision to treat with either medication (or not treat at all) was made based on considerations individual to each patient. In effect, it is thus practically impossible to really compare the different treatment groups. This is very well described in an accompanying comment in the same journal where the article appeared:
"Were the decision to withhold treatment related to poor prognosis (e.g. palliative intent), it stands to reason that patients receiving neither hydroxychloroquine nor azithromycin would have the highest mortality. Indeed, the non-treated group had an overall mortality that was higher than the rate of admission to the ICU (26.4% vs. 15.2%), suggesting that many patients were not considered appropriate for critical care." (Full comment here).

The usual suspects on Facebook are touting this study as "see! What does Dr. Fauci know, anyway?", without reading the study, much less understanding the stated limitations in the study. Why are these people so obsessed with anything that might show this treatment to be of use? Is it some conspiracy theory bullshit? Is it "defend Trump at all costs?" I just don't get the hard-on these people have for hydroxychloroquine.

----------------------------------
"Go yell at an M&M"
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [malte] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
malte wrote:
H- wrote:
Reports of another study in the Detroit News. I've no opinion not having studied the study, would appreciate your expertise.


The study has a number of important limitations due to the fact that it was retrospective and observational rather than randomized and controlled, which means the decision to treat with either medication (or not treat at all) was made based on considerations individual to each patient. In effect, it is thus practically impossible to really compare the different treatment groups. This is very well described in an accompanying comment in the same journal where the article appeared:
"Were the decision to withhold treatment related to poor prognosis (e.g. palliative intent), it stands to reason that patients receiving neither hydroxychloroquine nor azithromycin would have the highest mortality. Indeed, the non-treated group had an overall mortality that was higher than the rate of admission to the ICU (26.4% vs. 15.2%), suggesting that many patients were not considered appropriate for critical care." (Full comment here).

Not to early to call this the most concise post of the day in the LR.

Thanks.

________
It doesn't really matter what Phil is saying, the music of his voice is the appropriate soundtrack for a bicycle race. HTupolev
Quote Reply
Re: Another "Trump enemy" hydroxy study! [klehner] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
klehner wrote:
Is it "defend Trump at all costs?"

I strongly suspect it's closer to "defend Trump because they don't understand the costs."

War is god
Quote Reply

Prev Next