NIH end Hydroxychloroquine study

[smashycrashy]

A clinical trial to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of hydroxychloroquine for the treatment of adults hospitalized with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has been stopped by the National Institutes of Health. A data and safety monitoring board (DSMB) met late Friday and determined that while there was no harm, the study drug was very unlikely to be beneficial to hospitalized patients with COVID-19. After its fourth interim analysis the DSMB, which regularly monitors the trial, recommended to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (NHLBI), part of NIH, to stop the study. NHLBI halted the trial immediately.

The Outcomes Related to COVID-19 treated with hydroxychloroquine among In-patients with symptomatic Disease study, or ORCHID Study, was being conducted by the Prevention and Early Treatment of Acute Lung Injury (PETAL) Clinical Trials Network of NHLBI. The data from this study indicate that this drug provided no additional benefit compared to placebo control for the treatment of COVID-19 in hospitalized patients.

https://www.nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-halts-clinical-trial-hydroxychloroquine

[balgor]

Just yawn. Only hard core science deniers think HCQ works at this point. But, give it early with zinc and hawthorne berries while mars is in its 3rd perhillion!
Huh, what about Mar's position, huh? Why isn't there a study showing HCQ coordinated with Mar's position? See, scientists are clearly all involved in a vast global conspiracy to bring down trump.

[SAN compnerd]

Just yawn. Only hard core science deniers think HCQ works at this point. But, give it early with zinc and hawthorne berries while mars is in its 3rd perhillion!
Huh, what about Mar's position, huh? Why isn't there a study showing HCQ coordinated with Mar's position? See, scientists are clearly all involved in a vast global conspiracy to bring down trump.

You're comment makes no sense in light of current events. Two bogus studies have been fakes to show HCQ kills you, one resulted in a massive embarrassment to the Lancet and the NEJM and the company behind that study has already disappeared.

So far the only science we have on this is from that French doctor who has had great success with the treatment, unless you think he's lying for some unexplained reason. His paper showing that 973 people tested negative in 10 days after his treatment should not be ignored, but it is.

What you are witnessing is a coordinated effort to stop any science that might prove it's effectiveness, the WHO used the bogus study I mention above to stop several trials.

One day this past week an epidemiologist from UCSD or SDSU was on channel 5 and they asked him about HCQ and his response was that due to all the disinformation surrounding HCQ the science of learning if it's effective or not became untenable. He then said we still don't know if it is or not.

It's pretty clear to anyone not in the disinfo bubble (the one that can't seem to keep straight guidance on masks and social distancing and surface spread and asymptomatic transmission) see that there is clearly a coordinated effort to prevent the proper scientific study of HCQ in treating wuflu.

Some results from a study in Britain came out last week showing a certain steroid had a small but measurable effect on late stage wuflu patients.

What didn't make the news was the part of that report thats showed HCQ to increase the chance of death. The Dr. conducting the study was asked about his work with HCQ and he made some lame excuses about no knowing the proper dosing for a new disease, but his dosing for the test was above the known toxic dose of HCQ of 1800mg and he was giving patients 2400mg initial dose.

Maybe you can help me understand why a doctor would give patents a lethal
dose of medication and then call it a 'study'.

https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/2020/06/15/another-highly-touted-hydroxychloroquine-study-turns-out-to-be-a-joke/

[balgor]

You're comment makes no sense in light of current events. Two bogus studies have been fakes to show HCQ kills you, one resulted in a massive embarrassment to the Lancet and the NEJM and the company behind that study has already disappeared.

So far the only science we have on this is from that French doctor who has had great success with the treatment, unless you think he's lying for some unexplained reason. His paper showing that 973 people tested negative in 10 days after his treatment should not be ignored, but it is.

What you are witnessing is a coordinated effort to stop any science that might prove it's effectiveness, the WHO used the bogus study I mention above to stop several trials.

One day this past week an epidemiologist from UCSD or SDSU was on channel 5 and they asked him about HCQ and his response was that due to all the disinformation surrounding HCQ the science of learning if it's effective or not became untenable. He then said we still don't know if it is or not.

It's pretty clear to anyone not in the disinfo bubble (the one that can't seem to keep straight guidance on masks and social distancing and surface spread and asymptomatic transmission) see that there is clearly a coordinated effort to prevent the proper scientific study of HCQ in treating wuflu.

Some results from a study in Britain came out last week showing a certain steroid had a small but measurable effect on late stage wuflu patients.

What didn't make the news was the part of that report thats showed HCQ to increase the chance of death. The Dr. conducting the study was asked about his work with HCQ and he made some lame excuses about no knowing the proper dosing for a new disease, but his dosing for the test was above the known toxic dose of HCQ of 1800mg and he was giving patients 2400mg initial dose.

Maybe you can help me understand why a doctor would give patents a lethal
dose of medication and then call it a 'study'.





https://www.redstate.com/bonchie/202...-to-be-a-joke/

[SAN compnerd]

Raoult retracted his paper.
<snip>

I need to see a source for this claim.

Dexamethasone actually is proven to work in an RCT. Guess what team came up with that result? The RECOVERY team whose HCQ study you're criticizing.

Yes, I am aware of that information, seems a bit odd that they are treating the people who are near death, or at least that's who got the tiny measurable benefit from Dexamethasone. Something like 1 in 5 and 1 in 25 depending on comorbidities as I recall.

[balgor]

https://retractionwatch.com/2020/05/21/french-hydroxychloroquine-covid-19-study-withdrawn/

[SAN compnerd]

https://retractionwatch.com/2020/05/...udy-withdrawn/

Your story links to this piece:

https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.05.05.20088757v2

Nowhere in that list is any mention of Dr Raoult. It's not his study.

From the link:

The authors have withdrawn this manuscript and do not wish it to be cited. Because of controversy about hydroxychloroquine and the retrospective nature of their study, they intend to revise the manuscript after peer review.

Dr. Raoult's works was not retrospective, but the bogus VA study and the Lancet study were.

This is some of the most damaging propaganda/disinformation I have seen from folks like you thus far. This is a lie. This is not Dr. Raoult's study and he did not retract.

[balgor]

https://retractionwatch.com/2020/04/06/hydroxychlorine-covid-19-study-did-not-meet-publishing-societys-expected-standard/

I'm not going to respond to anymore HCQ blather. I may as well buy a Parrot and teach it the words: HCQ, Zinc, Raoult, and Zelenko. All current information points to one idea, it doesn't work on Covid-19. However, unlike you if new information presents itself, guess what I'll change my mind. For instance, if the UMN RCT using it as a treatment for Covid shows it works, I'll actually reconsider it. Sticking to a position despite all evidence to the contrary is completely incomprehensible to me.

[SAN compnerd]

https://retractionwatch.com/2020/04/...cted-standard/


I'm not going to respond to anymore HCQ blather. All current information point to one idea, it doesn't work on Covid-19. However, unlike you if new information presents itself, guess what I'll change my mind. For instance, if the UMN RCT using it as a treatment for Covid shows it works, I'll actually reconsider it. Sticking to a position despite all evidence to the contrary is completely incomprehensible to me.

More dishonsty. This piece is about the first rushed study Dr. Raoult did. It was a very small sample of people and yes, it did not really meet proper rigor.

Since then Dr. Rauolt has done a study on over 1000 patients. The draft report is here:

https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/MS.pdf

You are being intentionally dishonest. The first link you posted has a list of Dr's names and none of them are the same as this paper above. That's intentional disinfo.

It's also intentional disinfo to post a link to a study that was done months ago and has now been superseded by a proper scientific study linked above.

The only reason you wish to end the conversation is that you don't want to have an honest conversation, and you have proven it with two dishonest posts claiming something that is absolutely untrue.

It's kind of comical to me that you claim that you might change your position if new info is presented, but you point to outdated info as proof of your position and ignore the new information.

[Sierra57]

Just yawn. Only hard core science deniers think HCQ works at this point. But, give it early with zinc and hawthorne berries while mars is in its 3rd perhillion!
Huh, what about Mar's position, huh? Why isn't there a study showing HCQ coordinated with Mar's position? See, scientists are clearly all involved in a vast global conspiracy to bring down trump.

Which a why a bunch of doctors who have actually treated COVID 19 patients have put their reputations and jobs on the line by publicly stating HCQ is effective. The only people who say cannot bring themselves to even consider the possibility that HCQ works are depraved mental defectives whose synapses are not firing right.

All of this depraved caterwauling about HCQ because Trump said HCQ showed promise, and mental defectives cannot bear the thought of Trump being right about anything.

Such sick bast@rds.

Sick.

[Aeneas]

Some important things to consider. HCQ and Dexamethasone are two totally different things, with two different mechanisms, to treat different stages of the disease. Any study, trial, or anecdote that looks at HCQ past a certain stage in the infection is done by either ignorant or malicious people, as it has been well known for months that HCQ is of no benefit past a certain point in the infection.

It seems that HCQ, yes with zinc, may keep the virus from being able to enter and replicate in the cells, which would explain the findings of less time from positive to negative test results. This would be advantageous as it would limit the exposure of the virus to the immune system, which is the cause of severe disease in specific patients who have high viral loads.

The virus that is able to proliferate unchecked without effective pharmacological intervention will be met only by the subject's immune system, which may or may not be able to safely defeat the virus. Specific populations of patients, and others for unknown reasons, may have severe immune dysregulation which ends up causing the catastrophic effects of the disease. At this stage, the viral load will be lower because the body's innate defenses have already had time to fight the virus. That's why dexamethasone shows results at middle stages, as one of its functions is an immunosuppressant. That being written, it also must be given at the appropriate stage to have truly meaningful benefits.

[NorcalGSG]

More dishonsty. This piece is about the first rushed study Dr. Raoult did. It was a very small sample of people and yes, it did not really meet proper rigor.

Since then Dr. Rauolt has done a study on over 1000 patients. The draft report is here:

https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/MS.pdf

You are being intentionally dishonest. The first link you posted has a list of Dr's names and none of them are the same as this paper above. That's intentional disinfo.

It's also intentional disinfo to post a link to a study that was done months ago and has now been superseded by a proper scientific study linked above.

The only reason you wish to end the conversation is that you don't want to have an honest conversation, and you have proven it with two dishonest posts claiming something that is absolutely untrue.

It's kind of comical to me that you claim that you might change your position if new info is presented, but you point to outdated info as proof of your position and ignore the new information.

100%. Again, the suspected function of the trio is helping the zinc pass through cell walls to inhibit the virus replication similar to the concept of Airborne helping reduce the duration and severity of the cold when taken at the first sign of symptoms. Yet all the naysayers fail to recognize that for some unknown reason, in the US, like in the VA paper, the patients these TDS folks point to saying didn't respond to the HCQ treatment were not administered it until accute stage of the disease. (Compassionate use approval was for only accute patients for some reason) In other words, many were already on vents before administered, whereas other countries such as France were administering it at the very early stage of positive test or suspect of being positive.
Again, sunscreen works but not when applied after a person is already peeling and blistered.
I'm not (and nobody else is either) saying that the HCQ trio is the savior from Covid-19, but IMHO it does deserve a fair shake in terms of medical ethics to try and save as many lives as possible and treat the max number of people with a given amount of finite resources ($$) available to humans. When there is Obama appointees openly boasting that they used their positions to blatantly block the distribution of a likely effective medication during a pandemic for obviously political purposes, that should be grounds for dismissal from any and all positions of medical importance.

[tundraboomer]

Raoult retracted his paper. Either HCQ doesn't work or the NIH, WHO, NICE, Oxford, UMN, Vanderbilt...et al and hundreds of scientists all over the world are engaged in an anti-trump conspiracy.

[SAN compnerd]

100%. Again, the suspected function of the trio is helping the zinc pass through cell walls to inhibit the virus replication similar to the concept of Airborne helping reduce the duration and severity of the cold when taken at the first sign of symptoms. Yet all the naysayers fail to recognize that for some unknown reason, in the US, like in the VA paper, the patients these TDS folks point to saying didn't respond to the HCQ treatment were not administered it until accute stage of the disease. (Compassionate use approval was for only accute patients for some reason) In other words, many were already on vents before administered, whereas other countries such as France were administering it at the very early stage of positive test or suspect of being positive.
Again, sunscreen works but not when applied after a person is already peeling and blistered.
I'm not (and nobody else is either) saying that the HCQ trio is the savior from Covid-19, but IMHO it does deserve a fair shake in terms of medical ethics to try and save as many lives as possible and treat the max number of people with a given amount of finite resources ($$) available to humans. When there is Obama appointees openly boasting that they used their positions to blatantly block the distribution of a likely effective medication during a pandemic for obviously political purposes, that should be grounds for dismissal from any and all positions of medical importance.

I think most of us not in the disinformation game are gobsmacked at the malfeasance that has played out in the last few weeks WRT HCQ.

We just witnessed two respected medical journals retract a 'study' done by a big data analytics firm that turned out to be completely bogus, making it clear that they used bad data and big data analysis to find a scenario where HCQ increased the death rate and caused other complications.


But before this revelation was made the disinfo team in this forum had made sure everyong who visits here saw the bogus study and insisted it was true.

The real problem this caused (and why it seems contrived) is that the WHO used this bogus study to end many HCQ trials and destroyed that sciecne in the process. The NIH did something similar.

So you'd have to be completely blind to not see how the bogus effort to prove HCQ harmful was subsequently used to destroy any science that proves it's efficacy.

That's what should be top of mind for everyone, the fact that there is a pretty clear effort to prevent proper scientific study of HCQ, which is in and of itself an indication that it is effective.

[NorcalGSG]

Exactly. Here is another well written article to help explain what we're taking about here. Anyone with TDS please read objectively to see how this likely effective way to prevent people from becoming hospitalized in the first place has been bastardized and used as a political pawn to try and make the President look bad. It's disgusting, and the no-maskers/no-shutdowners should be screaming about this from the rooftops because if we used this (or ones like it) treatment to help reduce the hospitalization rate, plus masks to reduce the transmission rate, good gosh the shutdown could/should have been even shorter and the fiscal impacts greatly reduced for the country.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/stacey-lennox/2020/06/15/the-tedious-debate-about-hydroxychloroquine-for-covid-19-continues-n533818