Posted on 04/01/2020 8:53:02 AM PDT by motoman
As of April 1, 1524 total patients have been treated with Hydroxychloroquine with Azithromycin. Of this population, only 1 death has been recorded.
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/drug-hailed-trump-potential-coronavirus-133504622.html?guccounter=1&guce_referrer=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5mcmVlcmVwdWJsaWMuY29tL3RhZy9uZXdzLWZvcnVtL2luZGV4&guce_referrer_sig=AQAAAJ8W-7TAOATKD6wXR3OlVGfbWQodV1YxoF-l54-a3eWhIVqYKLj0vcWoTSHT0tQmzkopqEmMt5mi1kwkYWi3xA9kRueRdmBPnzdpeRO5OJn3deuN0aOmPptJsH99PKpL98U6YbRjC-TLncNISJpRx2zT7IWeZ04WoVlb8A3G-jse
And the Journal with impeccable credentials that has agreed to accept this work and rush it into print is?
Why isn’t this being used? And being used early to keep the virus from severely damaging the lungs and killing people?
Jeez
I’ve been following this site every day and watching the number of treated patients go up with only that very first death showing up. None since then.
The western world, particularly EU, has a pension problem....
I’ll leave the rest for you to fill in.
Wonder how many healthcare workers are taking it as a prophylactic?
It is being used. Also, if you want to reduce your risk of contracting this, just take zinc supplements with Green tea.
The New England Journal of Medicine, or NEJM, has had a long reputation since it’s inception long, LONG, ago for ironclad integrity. They have had an editorial policy since Day #1. They ONLY publish original work. I had a “friend” w ho published work previously published in the NEJM and they made the editorial comment they broke their own policy because “it’s important”. AFAIK that is the ONLY time they have ever done that. Sure, their recent. Libtard obsession with gun contro has hurt their reputation but not much.
Raoult’s work is unquestioningly “original”. The editors of the NEJM clearly would have an understanding of the importance of this paper. When the NEJM endorses this work we can know what it’s worth. Information this important should get action from the editorial staff at NEJM by this afternoon. Once they sign on Raoult is golden.
“And the Journal with impeccable credentials that has agreed to accept this work and rush it into print is?”
Superfluous
Because you know “Science”?
“Anecdotal evidence.” ... Dr. Fauci......................
I have a feeling that is why a lot of docs were writing prescription for it for themselves, to help protect themselves and their staff
Add quercetin
Praying that the anecdotal evidence is true.
Here’s my take after pouring over daily info published from various US stories:
- The FDA has stopped short of calling this a standard protocol for treatment.
- Us of this regiment is still highly dependent on doctor’s opinion/discreation
- Not all patients and families are even aware of this.
- Not all doctors are aware of this
- Trials are to date very conservative and targeting “severe” patients for compassionate use when their worsening state starts to look bleak (Note: the treatment has actually been showing to be effective in “many” of these severe cases).
- Dr’s are reluctant to prescribe the treatment if there is a judgement that the patient will recover otherwise (liability/malpractice fear).
Just not finding any evidence that Dr’s will prescribe this at time of “mild” symptoms or outpatient basis. Many believe that this would be key to much better manage this epidemic. Of course, patient would need to be evalated for risks/contraindications.
Sounds like you can call Zelekov. He was kind enough to give you his phone number.
Does anyone know if a person with high blood pressure can take HCQ? I like my cardiologist perhaps I could let him treat me...
I wonder how many patients had flu and pneumonia shots? No one seems to talk about that.
As long as you have NOT been diagnosed with “long QT syndrome”.
I don’t know how effective this substance is, anecdotal evidence is enough for the FDA to have approved it for some use, which I believe they should have done long ago.
But we know it is safe for human consumption under a physician’s supervision. It has been used for decades. It is safe.
In a situation where people who are at risk and either failing to respond or getting worse, I see no reason to wait for a medical publication to publish.
And scientific publication with “peer review” is largely a corrupt joke these days. Scientific rigor no longer exists in a way that justifies the happy stamp of “Peer Reviewed”.
If it were me or a loved one in that hospital bed, given the conditions, and given that we may irreparably destroy this world economy including ours if we let this go on indefinitely, I am all for giving this substance, prophylactic, placebo, cure or not.
Just my opinion. I understand that the substance is not totally without risk, but in a risk vs. benefit analysis, I don’t even think there is a question it should be approved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.