Thank God for Basenotes! A haven from the madness.

Status
Not open for further replies.

PStoller

I’m not old, I’m vintage.
Basenotes Plus
Aug 1, 2019
A doctor in France tried this, I think it was around 40 patients, if I recall, a couple weeks back and they all recovered, that was on the tv news. There's a doctor in New York that has treated I think around 700 patients now. It was 350 patients when he first reported the results, no deaths, no need for hospitalization out of the 350, and few hospitalizations out of the around 700 patients or so that he's treated in total now, and I think most of the patients were elderly. There was a doctor from I think New Jersey on tv a few days ago that was also reporting very good results with this. Just do a search, you'll find articles that directly quote the various doctors who have treated patients with this, some use various numbers of those ingredients. And of course there are other new drugs that are being worked on and tested also, but this one is cheap, well known and off-the-shelf, and can be made by any pharmaceutical company, so that's a big bonus. I found a video where they talk about this. I'm sure there are others. Oh, and Dr Fauci when asked if he as a doctor would prescribe hydroxychloroquine for a patient of his, he said he would. You can look up the quote if you like. With so many people now being treated with this (I think it's about 1100 in just New York), we'll have the answers very soon. Anyhow, in general the news on the medicine treatment front is good, and it will be nice when all this is over. =)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPPkhmPOwi0

PStoller: Yes, there can be secondary infections also, and anti-biotics are good for that, too. But there are studies showing that viruses can be within bacteria also.

Fauci's statement today: "We still need to do the definitive studies to determine whether any intervention, not just this one, is truly safe and effective. But when you don’t have that information, it’s understandable why people might want to take something anyway even with the slightest hint of being effective." When asked if he would take the drug himself if he were stricken with COVID-19, Fauci said he would only do so if it were as part of a clinical trial.

That's a hell of a long way from endorsing it as a treatment.

While I'm happy to entertain evidence that viruses can hide in bacteria, it's irrelevant, since there is no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 hides in bacteria, and that isn't why COVID-19 patients are given antibiotics along with their antivirals.

The test in France was of 36 patients. Of those, only 6 received the cocktail of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. In that test, all six of those patients reportedly recovered well; but, that's not nearly enough patients to constitute a conclusive result. And even within those limited parameters, questions have been raised about how that test was conducted. To date, that one test constitutes the bulk of the clinical evidence that hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin are effective in treating COVID-19. Per the CDC: "One small study reported that hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin reduced detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in upper respiratory tract specimens compared with a non-randomized control group but did not assess clinical benefit." Also: "There are no currently available data from Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) to inform clinical guidance on the use, dosing, or duration of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection."

Some in vitro studies indicate these drugs might be effective. There is historical use against other viruses that might be relevant. Or not. The rest of the evidence, including the testimony of one doctor in NJ who calls it a "game changer," is anecdotal. The sum of the evidence does not carry the weight of one properly designed and conducted study, let alone multiple studies that show the results are reproducible.

Regardless of your personal politics, you should understand that Fox's health reporting, like the rest of its reporting, is highly politicized. In this case, it could cost you your life. I mean this quite literally: on March 19, Fox News Health published the headline, "Drug cleared by Trump, FDA for coronavirus testing also found in fish tanks—and prices online are soaring." Within days, a man was dead and his wife critically ill after they ingested fish tank cleaner containing chloroquine phosphate. I have no interest in changing your political orientation, but for the sake of you and your loved ones, please get your health information from a better source.

None of this is to say that these drugs—taken at the proper time and in the proper dosage, and mindful of contraindications—might not indeed be a highly effective treatment against COVID-19. The problem is, they have as of yet undergone grossly insufficient scientific scrutiny. I really, really want them to work. I want this to be over quickly and everyone left saved. I also have access to these drugs, and if I or a loved one were found to be both infected and seriously ill, I wouldn't hesitate the way Fauci would. I would be desperate, as I imagine anyone would be. But, while desperate times may call for desperate measure, desperation is no substitute for science. And science is driven by method and data, not by opinions—not even the opinions of doctors, let alone those of news commentators or of armchair pundits like you and me.
 

jkonick

Well-known member
Feb 16, 2019
for the sake of you and your loved ones, please get your health information from a better source.

There is so much confusion and mixed messaging right now, regardless of what you usually follow, it is important to have some diversity in your news diet right now. Without saying which I prefer, I read/watch Fox, CNN and MSNBC pretty much every day. I don’t want to get my hopes up too much based on any one recommendation or approach, so it’s most helpful to me to just be abreast of the various approaches different people are taking right now. I just hope regardless that a vaccine can be produced and tested relatively quickly.
 

gerbick

Well-known member
Jun 13, 2009
I don't see that Dunedain was suggesting people self-medicate with chloroquine (or hydroxychloroquine, aka Plaquenil), which would indeed be reckless; he was simply reporting that American doctors would start administering it today, presumably taking care with regard to contraindications, drug interactions, and ADRs.

We still need treatment options for those ineligible for hydroxychloroquine therapy, but at least it's a start.

I called it earlier in the thread.
 

Lellabelle

Well-known member
Aug 16, 2015
Fauci's statement today: "We still need to do the definitive studies to determine whether any intervention, not just this one, is truly safe and effective. But when you don’t have that information, it’s understandable why people might want to take something anyway even with the slightest hint of being effective." When asked if he would take the drug himself if he were stricken with COVID-19, Fauci said he would only do so if it were as part of a clinical trial.

That's a hell of a long way from endorsing it as a treatment.

While I'm happy to entertain evidence that viruses can hide in bacteria, it's irrelevant, since there is no evidence that SARS-CoV-2 hides in bacteria, and that isn't why COVID-19 patients are given antibiotics along with their antivirals.

The test in France was of 36 patients. Of those, only 6 received the cocktail of hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin. In that test, all six of those patients reportedly recovered well; but, that's not nearly enough patients to constitute a conclusive result. And even within those limited parameters, questions have been raised about how that test was conducted. To date, that one test constitutes the bulk of the clinical evidence that hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin are effective in treating COVID-19. Per the CDC: "One small study reported that hydroxychloroquine alone or in combination with azithromycin reduced detection of SARS-CoV-2 RNA in upper respiratory tract specimens compared with a non-randomized control group but did not assess clinical benefit." Also: "There are no currently available data from Randomized Clinical Trials (RCTs) to inform clinical guidance on the use, dosing, or duration of hydroxychloroquine for prophylaxis or treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infection."

Some in vitro studies indicate these drugs might be effective. There is historical use against other viruses that might be relevant. Or not. The rest of the evidence, including the testimony of one doctor in NJ who calls it a "game changer," is anecdotal. The sum of the evidence does not carry the weight of one properly designed and conducted study, let alone multiple studies that show the results are reproducible.

Regardless of your personal politics, you should understand that Fox's health reporting, like the rest of its reporting, is highly politicized. In this case, it could cost you your life. I mean this quite literally: on March 19, Fox News Health published the headline, "Drug cleared by Trump, FDA for coronavirus testing also found in fish tanks—and prices online are soaring." Within days, a man was dead and his wife critically ill after they ingested fish tank cleaner containing chloroquine phosphate. I have no interest in changing your political orientation, but for the sake of you and your loved ones, please get your health information from a better source.

None of this is to say that these drugs—taken at the proper time and in the proper dosage, and mindful of contraindications—might not indeed be a highly effective treatment against COVID-19. The problem is, they have as of yet undergone grossly insufficient scientific scrutiny. I really, really want them to work. I want this to be over quickly and everyone left saved. I also have access to these drugs, and if I or a loved one were found to be both infected and seriously ill, I wouldn't hesitate the way Fauci would. I would be desperate, as I imagine anyone would be. But, while desperate times may call for desperate measure, desperation is no substitute for science. And science is driven by method and data, not by opinions—not even the opinions of doctors, let alone those of news commentators or of armchair pundits like you and me.

Well said.
 

PStoller

I’m not old, I’m vintage.
Basenotes Plus
Aug 1, 2019
There is so much confusion and mixed messaging right now, regardless of what you usually follow, it is important to have some diversity in your news diet right now. Without saying which I prefer, I read/watch Fox, CNN and MSNBC pretty much every day. I don’t want to get my hopes up too much based on any one recommendation or approach, so it’s most helpful to me to just be abreast of the various approaches different people are taking right now. I just hope regardless that a vaccine can be produced and tested relatively quickly.
That is both a reasonable approach and a shared hope. Just understand that "relatively quickly" in the context of vaccine development is still a year or more away. We may have to play fast and loose with safety regulations when it comes to medication of patients who will almost certainly die without treatment—hence the emergency approval of a virtually untested regime—but vaccines are for healthy people, and you really don't want to get that wrong. For the time being, keep your distance + soap & water = your best bet.
 

jkonick

Well-known member
Feb 16, 2019
That is both a reasonable approach and a shared hope. Just understand that "relatively quickly" in the context of vaccine development is still a year or more away. We may have to play fast and loose with safety regulations when it comes to medication of patients who will almost certainly die without treatment—hence the emergency approval of a virtually untested regime—but vaccines are for healthy people, and you really don't want to get that wrong. For the time being, keep your distance + soap & water = your best bet.

Definitely - I think keeping your hopes tempered is important, as Fauci has emphasized in terms of predictions about when we will have a viable vaccine, not to mention a national rollout plan for getting everyone vaccinated. It seems safe to assume we’ll be in this for a while, so I’m just focusing on following the CDC guidelines until it’s all over.
 

Pallas Moncreiff

Well-known member
Dec 16, 2018
The willful ignorance, the shallowness, the lack of understanding what literal Hell (morbid disease and death) others are going through and no qualms about spreading scientifically non-corroborated data—it’s just astounding.
 

Lellabelle

Well-known member
Aug 16, 2015
The willful ignorance, the shallowness, the lack of understanding what literal Hell (morbid disease and death) others are going through and no qualms about spreading scientifically non-corroborated data—it’s just astounding.

I understand your frustration, and your anger.

A positive message is easier to cling to than a negative one; what we’re able to accept is limited by what we’re able to understand. For many, I expect it’s not willful, but rather a form of psychological self-preservation. Fear is powerful.

We have access to more information, more quickly, than at any point in history. And yet our ability to question and critically evaluate the information we consume is weaker than ever.
 
Jul 7, 2012
The willful ignorance, the shallowness, the lack of understanding what literal Hell (morbid disease and death) others are going through and no qualms about spreading scientifically non-corroborated data—it’s just astounding.

SERIOUSLY.

I can't believe how many people are spreading false information about medications they know absolutely nothing about as if they're medical experts. It's ignorant. It's irresponsible. It's just plain wrong.

When that kind of irresponsible nonsense shows up here on the forum, it needs to be flagged and removed. It's inexcusably wrong.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest News

Top