Posted on 04/15/2020 7:56:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
A drug that’s been touted by President Donald Trump as a “game changer” didn’t help hospitalized patients with coronavirus and was associated with heart complications, according to a new study.
“This provides evidence that hydroxychloroquine does not apparently treat patients with Covid 19,” said Dr. Paul Offit, an infectious disease specialist at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “Even worse, there were side effects caused by the drug — heart toxicities that required it be discontinued.”
Trump has said that hydroxychloroquine shows “tremendous promise” and has made it sound like the drug is harmless.
“I think it’s going to be great,” Trump said at a White House briefing on March 19.
“What do you have to lose? Take it,” he said on April 4.
Physicians have warned that while Trump is enthusiastic about the drug, it still needs to be studied to see if it works and if it’s safe.
“People can claim what they want, but the proof is in the pudding, and this is the pudding,” Offit said.
In the French study, doctors looked back at medical records for 181 patients with Covid-19 who had pneumonia and required supplemental oxygen. About half had taken hydroxychloroquine within 48 hours of being admitted to the hospital, and the other half had not.
The doctors followed the patients and found there was no statistically significant difference in the death rates of the two groups, or their chances of being admitted to the intensive care unit.
The study also raised important safety concerns about hydroxychloroquine.
In the study, eight patients who took the drug developed abnormal heart rhythms and had to stop taking it.
Abnormal heart rhythms are a known side effect of hydroxychloroquine, which has been used for decades to treat patients with diseases such as malaria, lupus and rheumatoid arthritis.
Doctors in Sweden and Brazil have sounded warnings about chloroquine, a very similar drug, because of heart problems.
In the new study, among the 84 patients who took hydroxychloroquine, 20.2% were admitted to the ICU or died within seven days of taking the drug. Among the 97 patients who did not take the drug, 22.1% went to the ICU or died.
The difference was not determined to be statistically different
Looking just at deaths, 2.8% of the patients who took hydroxychloroquine died, and 4.6% of the patients who did not take it died. That difference was also not found to be statistically significant.
“These results do not support the use of [hydroxychloroquine] in patients hospitalised for documented SARSCoV-2-positive hypoxic pneumonia,” the study authors wrote.
The study was published Tuesday on medRxiv.org, a pre-print server founded by Yale University, the journal BMJ and Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory. Studies published on this website have not been peer reviewed.
1. Penirillin won’t work to cure someone who already has gangrene. This is a FALSE study - it was designed to fail, but giving a medication when the patients were already overwhelmed. The best use of HCQ is early in the course of coronavirus, and given in conjunction with azithromycin and zinc. If this study had done this, the results would have been different.
2. WRT side effects, particularly heart issues, AGAIN this study was designed to fail. First, HCQ only has bad effects after long-term use. Doctors treating patients with RA or Lupus do NOT test their patients’ hearts before prescribing HCQ for a reason - because there IS no reason to do so. Example #1, my 82 y.o. mother, who has RA and has been on HCQ every day for the last 5 years - DESPITE having a cardiac arrhythmia for the last 15 years has had ZERO side effects - not WRT her heart, nor retina problems (another possible LT problem with HCQ).
This is a safe medication. Those against using it for treating the coronavirus are, almost to a person, very much anti-Trump. They are literally hoping/advocating for people to die in order to make Trump look bad. Scumbags, all.
CNN?
More like CCPNN
Ah, Dr. Offit. The vaccine industry’s chief propagandist. They’re all coming out of the woodwork now.
It’s not a study designed to fail. It’s a retrospective study. They’re looking back at what already happened and comparing the results.
they are french, the study surrendered before it began.
those cheese eating surrender monkies.
and fu i’m part french so fu if you’re offended
Notice all 181 patients had hypoxemic pneumonia (can’t get enough oxygen.) They didn’t give them antibiotics for the pneumonia. This is malpractice
So, dosing a person with final death rattles doesn’t rejuvenate them...I knew it was too good to be true.....I just knew it....
Clinical trials investigate when a drug is useful, when it’s not, proper dosage, and side-effects. All this information is good. Eventually, we will know what we have. It won’t be magic. It’ll be calibrated. In the meanwhile, we’r using the drug on a compassionate basis. For many, it’s not only the best hope, it’s the only hope. Yes, I. agree, better to prescribe hydroxy early. And, did I mention, it’s cheap.
From a poll released yesterday:
Do you support or oppose the use of hydroxychloroquine to treat COVID-19 before the NIH is done testing its effectiveness?
Republicans favor 71 to 12
Democrats oppose 50 to 29
Christians favor 54 to 29
atheists oppose 24 to 61
The reason CNN published this study is because the death worshipers want people to die.
When I see anything posted on here from CNN or the Washington Post I move on. No sense in reading anti-American and anti-Trump drivel.
So only go to Dr Offit if you want to die. He won’t even try to help you. He should be called Dr Death.
France: It worked until it didn’t
GIGO
Garbage In Garbage Out
Not following your prescribed treatment (or your prescribed outcomes...) does not make it a bad study. We need to know what hydroxychloroquine does when given all on its own, too. It does have significant, known side effects. Is there a subset of patients who will be harmed or killed by giving it to them?
RE: This was a retrospective study. The study was NOT designed to treat patients with already badly damaged lungs. It wasn’t designed to replicate anything. The study was designed to look back at patients who had already been treated and see what the outcomes were.
Then how does the study square with the title of this thread? ( not mine but CNN’s ).
“They didn’t give them antibiotics for the pneumonia.”
yeah,i saw that too ... nor the zinc ... and yes it was medical malpractice ...
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.