Replies

So, yes, he is saying that if he gets a patient so far gone that he can't make it 3 days on this treatment (e.g. on the 24th day of stay in ICU), he is not going to count him in his efficacy cohort as having undergone the treatment.

I get it. If the subject is so far gone that basically no medication will work (i.e. he has less than a couple days or even hours to live), I would guess counting that subject would actually decrease the reliability of the clinical test, which is supposed to be determining whether administering to those with mild to first-onset of symptoms will prevent lengthy hospitalization in the first place.

I still have yet to see somebody say "well, we gave him hydroxy, he died anyway". Not saying that hasn't happened, but I feel like the media would be blasting it everywhere (like they have for the fish tank chemical eaters) if it did.

Where's this story: "guy came in with shortness of breath, tested positive for COVID, was given hydroxychloroquine + azithro, he got worse, he died? Even just "he got worse, ended up on a ventilator". I haven't seen it.

Where's this story: "guy came in with shortness of breath, tested positive for COVID, was given hydroxychloroquine + azithro, he got worse, he died? Even just "he got worse, ended up on a ventilator". I haven't seen it.

And you know if that story did exist, it would be published and touted far-and-wide.