Posted on 03/25/2020 6:42:39 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
In a prime example of why President Trump shouldn’t be endorsing any unproven potential treatments for the novel coronavirus behind the current global pandemic, a new small-scale study by researchers in China indicates that the antimalarial drug hydroxychloroquine actually isn’t any more effective than standard, existing best practice for conventional care of patients with the virus.
The study, which included 30 patients with a control of 15 who received no treatment, with the other half being treated with hydroxychloroquine, showed that there was a statistically insignificant difference in the number of patients who tested negative for the drug after a week. During the study, those who received conventional treatment were provided anti-virals that are currently recommended for use in China, including Iopinavir and ritonavir, and after a week, 13 of the 15 control patients showed no sign of the virus, while 14 of the 15 who were treated with hydroxychloroquine showed the same.
An earlier small-scale study of 30 patients by French researchers published last week had shown indication that hydroxychloroquine used alone was effective in reducing the duration and severity of COVID-19, while using it in combination with an antibiotic called azithromycin increased its effectiveness. The study has been criticized by some for its methods – which is the entire purpose of scientific study and medical research, wherein people submit their studies for peer review prior to publication, and then other researchers challenge their assumptions, results and findings.
Trump is obviously not a scientist or medical professional, and yet he has been touting the efficacy of hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine during the White House’s daily coronavirus task force press briefings, and on Twitter, including when he called for them to be “put in use IMMEDIATELY” on March 21.
(Excerpt) Read more at techcrunch.com ...
But he touted a drug combo. The study is false.
I’m wondering whose rice bowl is threatened.
Well done!!!!
Are Iopinavir and ritonavir the standard of care in US? I thought there were no therapeutics for the virus.
Well hydroxychloroquine with zpak is only slightly more effective than our much more expensive antivirals still on patent, so definitely use the antivirals. That’s how I’m reading this.
“In a prime example of why President Trump shouldn’t be......” blah blah blah
this writer, like most of those purveying medical and scientific messages, is himself not a scientist, nor a doctor, a researcher, an epidemiologist, a virologist, a mathematician, etc.
he is an English major who became a creative writing teacher and then a blogger and then a tech blogger.
in short, a know nothing.
Here’s another Chinese Study Published in Nature:
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41421-020-0156-0
Hydroxychloroquine, a less toxic derivative of chloroquine, is effective in inhibiting SARS-CoV-2 infection in vitro
(EXCERPT)
CQ appears to be the drug of choice for large-scale use due to its availability, proven safety record, and a relatively low cost. In light of the preliminary clinical data, CQ has been added to the list of trial drugs in the Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Treatment of COVID-19 (sixth edition) published by National Health Commission of the People’s Republic of China.
So, which Chinese study to believe? Tech Crunch’s or the one published in Nature?
The author gets to be in the control group getting the placebo....
Ah, the American Left. Criticize the French study that shows it works, accept uncritically the Communist Chinese government study that says it doesn’t.
Are 30 patents enough to constitute a serious study? Most people get better anyway, so such a small number proves nothing.
First the article says that the control group received no treatment. Later it says that they received conventional treatment. Am I missing something?
Not enough numbers. To be statistically significant you have to have at least 15 data points. They have only 30, 15 of which are controls. And heaven only knows how tight they were with procedures.
” a new small-scale study by researchers in China”
That’s as far as I needed to read.
RE: Well hydroxychloroquine with zpak is only slightly more effective than our much more expensive antivirals still on patent, so definitely use the antivirals.
The point in the article is NOT that hydroxychloroquine with zpak doesn’t work, the author’s point is that the small scale study says that using this drug combo isn’t more effective than standard best practice being used today.
confounding variables.
Genetic homogeneity of the chinese community for one, possibly indicating differences in metabolism of hydroxychloroquine which alter efficacy. G6PD is one example of an enzyme with several genetic variations and the HCQ package insert warns of homolytic anemia risk from the medication (although other sources suggest this is over-estimated).
Sample size is also absurdly low, likely statistically insignificant.
china virus narrative(s) = headless chickens.
You also have trials going on in Minnesota and Kansas City just to name a few. I think we will know, scientifically, in a short while. Doctors on the front lines seen positive though.
IDIOT!!!!
It's not about "testing negative...after a week"!!!!!!!
It's about being symptom free after a week!!!!!!!!!!!
If Trump hailed Jonas Salk’s vaccine for Polio, the Press would cast doubt on it.
30 patients.
Vs the 350 and 0 record rolled up by Dr. Zelenko in NY State.
This is an OP.
What’s number of people who “recovered” that received no meds?
so the difference between the 2 treatments is the antiviral is 87% vs 93% statistically insignificant-—but these numbers just show there are multiple solutions. I’ll take a 90% recovered any day.
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.