Who are these perps? This is apparently the study being touted by the mockingbirds.
Outcomes of hydroxychloroquine usage in United States veterans hospitalized with Covid-19
Joseph Magagnoli, Siddharth Narendran, Felipe Pereira, Tammy Cummings, James W Hardin, S Scott Sutton, Jayakrishna Ambati
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920
This article is a preprint and has not been certified by peer review [what does this mean?]. It reports new medical research that has yet to be evaluated and so should not be used to guide clinical practice.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v1
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Despite limited and conflicting data on the use of hydroxychloroquine in patients with Covid-19, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has authorized the emergency use of this drug when clinical trials are unavailable or infeasible. Hydroxychloroquine, alone or in combination with azithromycin, is being widely used in Covid-19 therapy based on anecdotal and limited observational evidence. METHODS: We performed a retrospective analysis of data from patients hospitalized with confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection in all United States Veterans Health Administration medical centers until April 11, 2020. Patients were categorized based on their exposure to hydroxychloroquine alone (HC) or with azithromycin (HC+AZ) as treatments in addition to standard supportive management for Covid-19. The two primary outcomes were death and the need for mechanical ventilation. We determined the association between treatment and the primary outcomes using competing risk hazard regression adjusting for clinical characteristics via propensity scores. Discharge and death were taken into account as competing risks and subdistribution hazard ratios are presented. RESULTS: A total of 368 patients were evaluated (HC, n=97; HC+AZ, n=113; no HC, n=158). Rates of death in the HC, HC+AZ, and no HC groups were 27.8%, 22.1%, 11.4%, respectively. Rates of ventilation in the HC, HC+AZ, and no HC groups were 13.3%, 6.9%, 14.1%, respectively. Compared to the no HC group, the risk of death from any cause was higher in the HC group (adjusted hazard ratio, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.10 to 6.17; P=0.03) but not in the HC+AZ group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% CI, 0.56 to 2.32; P=0.72). The risk of ventilation was similar in the HC group (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.43; 95% CI, 0.53 to 3.79; P=0.48) and in the HC+AZ group (adjusted hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.16 to 1.12; P=0.09), compared to the no HC group. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, we found no evidence that use of hydroxychloroquine, either with or without azithromycin, reduced the risk of mechanical ventilation in patients hospitalized with Covid-19. An association of increased overall mortality was identified in patients treated with hydroxychloroquine alone. These findings highlight the importance of awaiting the results of ongoing prospective, randomized, controlled studies before widespread adoption of these drugs.
Competing Interest Statement
Disclosure forms provided by the authors are available with the NEJM. JA is a co-founder of iVeena Holdings, iVeena Delivery Systems and Inflammasome Therapeutics, and has received consultancy fees from Allergan, Biogen, Boehringer Ingelheim, Immunovant, Janssen, Olix Pharmaceuticals, Retinal Solutions, and Saksin LifeSciences, all unrelated to this work. JA is named as an inventor on a patent application filed by the University of Virginia relating to Covid-19 but unrelated to this work. SSS has received research grants from Boehringer Ingelheim, Gilead Sciences, Portola Pharmaceuticals, and United Therapeutics, all unrelated to this work. The other authors declare no competing interests.
Funding Statement
National Institutes of Health University of Virginia
Author Declarations
All relevant ethical guidelines have been followed; any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained and details of the IRB/oversight body are included in the manuscript.
The Mockingbird MSM insists that the virus is more serious than it is. They declare that an effective treatment doesn’t work.
They really want to inoculate everyone.
For what purpose?
Their ultimate aim is a reduction of population.
Could the two be connected?
Is this a way for them to force a marker on people, and declare that no one can work, who has not been inoculated?
Worth watching..haven’t researched independently, but if true wow
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=ndy76mJHD6o
Published on Apr 16, 2020
Philosopher Stefan Molyneux in conversation with Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai about health, coronavirus, Dr Fauci, Bill Gates, the Gate Foundation, the Clinton Foundation - and what REALLY killed Freddie Mercury!
I’m guessing no one looked at the actual report.
It’s a study, not a clinical trial, hence it’s anecdotal.
(As an example, “Dr. Vladimir Zelenko says he has now treated 699 coronavirus patients with 100% success
using Hydroxychloroquine Sulfate, Zinc, and Z-Pak”) is also anecdotal except it’s concurrent, not retrospective.
and this doctor had a higher number of cases.
So what does the headline “Largest yet survey...” actually mean?
The VA study was retrospective.
The data for the study was mined post-action.
Patients age range is 59-75 with a median age = 66.
All patients in the study were male.
17 infected female patients were not included in the study.
Interestingly, an overwhelming majority, 236 of 368 male patients, were black - this is a current identified nationwide trend.
Neither zinc or the z-pack was administered in any of these cases.
of the 368:
248 had diabetes.
7 had cancer
9 had HIV
92 had renal disease
72 had COPD
18 previously had heart attacks.
85 had congestive heart failure
8 were paraplegic\hemiplegic
Nothing indicates these are unique, so 1 person could have all the under-lying conditions.
There were 70 deaths and no mention of deaths by race.
https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v1.full.pdf
and so it goes...
Re Mockingbird Media:
Those lazy bastards just regurgitate the pulp written by the deep state. Most of them don’t even change the wording!
I despise them.