Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hydroxychloroquine

Collapse

Unconfigured Ad Widget

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by user4 View Post
    This is a truly heart warming thread, just seeing some of my dearest friends and most impassioned posters express such deep and sincere concern for the president's health. This is a true break through.
    Political leanings aside, no one should wish harm on someone else, certainly not the president. The current pandemic is disorienting enough, the last thing we should wish for is political instability in the White House.

    I hope I did not misinterpret your post.

    Comment


    • #47
      Meanwhile....

      Bolsonaro Touts Chloroquine for All as Brazil’s Virus Toll Surges

      With Covid-19 cases setting record after record in Brazil, an 86-year-old anti-malarial drug with an unproven track record against the coronavirus is taking center stage in the country’s political debate and public life.

      Under orders of President Jair Bolsonaro, the health ministry on Wednesday loosened protocols for the use of chloroquine, indicating it even for mild cases of the virus despite dangerous side effects, experts’ warnings and no demonstrated success in clinical trials.

      Undeterred, the president has ordered the military to ramp up production of the drug as he makes it a key element in the anti-virus fight, losing two health ministers in the process due in part to their objections to the plan.


      https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/a...mpression=true

      Comment


      • #48
        Meanwhile...

        World Health Organization warns against hydroxychloroquine use for covid-19

        World Health Organization Executive Director Mike Ryan indirectly pushed back against President Trump’s touting of hydroxychloroquine as a treatment for the novel coronavirus, saying at a news conference Wednesday that the anti-malaria medicine should not be used beyond its officially tested prescriptions.

        https://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ZNLOQU4NEWOBII

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Conor Dary View Post
          Meanwhile....

          Bolsonaro Touts Chloroquine for All as Brazil’s Virus Toll Surges

          With Covid-19 cases setting record after record in Brazil, an 86-year-old anti-malarial drug with an unproven track record against the coronavirus is taking center stage in the country’s political debate and public life.

          Under orders of President Jair Bolsonaro, the health ministry on Wednesday loosened protocols for the use of chloroquine, indicating it even for mild cases of the virus despite dangerous side effects, experts’ warnings and no demonstrated success in clinical trials.

          Undeterred, the president has ordered the military to ramp up production of the drug as he makes it a key element in the anti-virus fight, losing two health ministers in the process due in part to their objections to the plan.


          https://www.bloomberg.com/amp/news/a...mpression=true
          Watching politicians practice medicine always opens a knife in my pocket.
          "A beautiful theory killed by an ugly fact."
          by Thomas Henry Huxley

          Comment


          • #50
            I'm a retired internist, and I'm among those who have seen no credible evidence that hydroxychloroquine is effective. That Trump and Bolsonaro are eagerly touting it as a treatment speaks volumes about their inabilities to analyze information.
            I live in Reno and, in past times, many world-famous entertainers performed here, and would pressure colleagues to treat their maladies with high-powered antibiotics and steroids, for example. After hearing some of their stories, I was glad that I never became a "physician to the Stars". My closest encounter came one afternoon, when I returned from skiing, and my home phone rang. When I answered, it was my answering service, and a famous and beautiful TV actress from those days had been trying to reach me, apparently because she felt tired, and wanted a B12 shot. Once a physician becomes ensnared with treating the rich/famous/powerful, it can be easy for innocuous requests to escalate to potentially dangerous prescriptions, including narcotics

            Comment


            • #51
              I've read some internet speculation that Trump really hasn't taken the drug, but is just saying so. I doubt that anyone will ever know for sure.

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by KDFINE View Post
                I've read some internet speculation that Trump really hasn't taken the drug, but is just saying so. I doubt that anyone will ever know for sure.
                The note offered up as from his doc did not say he was taking it. It was very oddly worded.

                Comment


                • #53
                  we're not in the business of "internet speculation" here; facts only please.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    Originally posted by DrJay View Post
                    The risk of dangerous cardiac arrhythmias from hydroxychloroquine is really low, so low that, in my experience, rheumatologists do not even do any EKG monitoring in lupus patients on the drug. The increased mortality in the very sick people in the VA study may have been cardiac mortality but in that population, their myocardium is probably already very "irritable", if you will, from the profound systemic inflammatory response, and this would significantly increase that risk. That said, the big issue here is that a crappy little "study" by a charlatan "scientist" in France got this whole ball rolling. What we need is a political leader who relies on data, listens to his scientific advisors, and does not simply listen to his "gut feelings" as the world faces its biggest calamity since World War II.
                    As you say, the risk profile is low and known, but only for the dosages and frequencies employed for well studied diseases. However, COVID-19 isn't part of that set up and you make a good point about at least one increased risk factor. With this disease, nothing is well known especially as it seems that higher, more frequent dosages have been touted for COVID-19 treatment.

                    A novel use of an existing drug, in novel usage patterns against a novel disease. What could go wrong!

                    Raoult is an interesting case, apparently he was a good scientist but seems to have been unable to control his god complex as time passed. He apparently co-authors every single paper at his institute as a matter of course. That's not the sign of an ethical intellect.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      I think I linked this in another thread, but here it is again, about Raoult:
                      https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/12/m...lRenhe-SH_FMyw

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by DrJay View Post
                        I think I linked this in another thread, but here it is again, about Raoult:
                        https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/12/m...lRenhe-SH_FMyw
                        Thanks for posting that thought-provoking article, which can serve as a reminder of the dangers of dogma in science. Even Pasteur was ridiculed early on, but eventually prevailed. I'm a retired practitioner, and not a scientist, but I'll rely on well-constructed clinical trials that are double-blinded, while Raoult seems to rely on instinct and his conviction that he's smarter than everyone else. It will be interesting to see how this controversy plays out with more studies being done by scientists who try, as much as possible, to eliminate their own biases from their investigations.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          Just saw in the news today, report from the Lancet on Hydroxychloroquine. A study of 96,000 patients. Not sure if its anything new

                          https://www.thelancet.com/journals/l...180-6/fulltext


                          And article on the study from the Washington post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/healt...navirus-study/

                          A study of 96,000 hospitalized coronavirus patients on six continents found that those who received an antimalarial drug.......had a significantly higher risk of death compared with those who did not.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by gh View Post
                            we're not in the business of "internet speculation" here; facts only please.
                            It seems to me that the difficulty here is that when one wants to comment on the facts about the covid-19 debate, one is often reduced to commenting on the wild speculation of individual(s) who are (is) at the center of the covid-19 crisis.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Tuariki View Post
                              It seems to me that the difficulty here is that when one wants to comment on the facts about the covid-19 debate, one is often reduced to commenting on the wild speculation of individual(s) who are (is) at the center of the covid-19 crisis.
                              I see sales for the drug are thru the roof. I suspect some profiteering.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Originally posted by Django View Post

                                Thanks for posting that thought-provoking article, which can serve as a reminder of the dangers of dogma in science. Even Pasteur was ridiculed early on, but eventually prevailed. I'm a retired practitioner, and not a scientist, but I'll rely on well-constructed clinical trials that are double-blinded, while Raoult seems to rely on instinct and his conviction that he's smarter than everyone else. It will be interesting to see how this controversy plays out with more studies being done by scientists who try, as much as possible, to eliminate their own biases from their investigations.
                                Jacob Bronowski on dogma in science, from my all-time favorite book - The Ascent of Man:

                                It is said that science will dehumanise people and turn them into numbers. That is false, tragically false. Look for yourself. This is the concentration camp and crematorium at
                                Auschwitz. This is where people were turned into numbers. Into this pond were flushed the ashes of some four million people. And that was not done by gas. It was done by arrogance. It was done by dogma. It was done by ignorance. When people believe that they have absolute knowledge, with no test in reality, this is how they behave. This is what men do when they aspire to the knowledge of the gods.

                                Science is a very human form of knowledge. We are always at the brink of the known, we always feel forward for what is to be hoped. Every judgment in science stands on the edge of error, and is personal. Science is a tribute to what we can know although we are fallible. In the end the words were said by Oliver Cromwell: “I beseech you, within the bowels of Christ, think it possible you may be mistaken.”

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X