Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

BOMBSHELL: FORMAL REBUKE FROM FRENCH DOC (Didier Raoult) ON HCQ! [TRANSLATED]
Medrxiv ^ | 12/22/2020 | Didier Raoult

Posted on 04/22/2020 6:28:32 PM PDT by Steven W.

https://twitter.com/raoult_didier/status/1253045368377561093

Didier raoult @raoult_didier

The study published in pre-print on 04/21 on Medrxiv by Maganoli et al has three major biases which invalidate its conclusions, in any case absurd and incompatible with the literature. We have detailed these biases in the letter below.

https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/response-to-magagnoli-medrxiv-2020/

Response to Magagnoli, MedRxiv, 2020 Matthieu MILLION

https://www.mediterranee-infection.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/Response-to-Magagnoli.pdf

In the current period, it seems that passion dominates rigorous and balanced scientific analysis and may lead to scientific misconduct. The article by Magagnoli et al. (Magagnoli, 2020) is an absolutely spectacular example of this. Indeed, in this work, it is concluded, in the end, that hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) would double the mortality in patients with COVID with a fatality rate of 28% (versus 11% in the NoHCQ group), which is extraordinarily hard to believe. The analysis of the data shows two major biases, which show a welling to be convinced before starting the work :

The first is that lymphopenia is twice as common in the HCQ groups (25% in the HCQ, 31% in the HCQ+AZ group versus 14% in the no HCQ group, p =.02) and there is an absolute correlation between lymphopenia (<0.5G/L) and fatality rate, which is well known (Tan, 2020) and confirmed here : 28% deaths, 22% and 11% in the HCQ, HCQ+AZ and No HCQ group, respectively. Lymphopenia is the most obvious criterion of patient severity (in our cohort, lymphocytes in dead individuals (n=22, mean ± standard deviation, 0.94 ± 0.45), versus in the living (n=2405, 1.79 ± 0.84, p < .0001)). As the authors acknowledge, the severity of the patients in the different groups was very different, and their analysis can only make sense if there is a selection of patients with the same degree of severity, i.e. the same percentage of lymphopenia.

The second major bias is that in an attempt to provide meaningful data, by eliminating the initial severity at the time of treatment, two tables are shown: one table where drugs are prescribed before intubation, and which shows no significant difference in the 3 different groups (9/90 (10%) in the HCQ group, 11/101 (10. 9%) HCQ+AZ, and 15/177 (8.5%) in the group without HCQ, chi-square = 0.47, ddl = 2, p = 0.79), and one table, where it is not clear when the drugs were prescribed, where there are significant differences. These differences are most likely related to the fact that the patients had been intubated for some before receiving hydroxychloroquine in desperation. It is notable that this is unreasonable at the time of the cytokine storm, as it is unlikely that hydrochloroquine alone would be able to control patients at this stage of the disease.

Moreover, incomprehensibly, the “untreated” group actually received azithromycin in 30% of cases, without this group being analyzed in any distinct way. Azithromycin is also a proposed treatment for COVID (Gautret, 2020) with in vitro efficacy (Andreani, 2020), and to mix it with patients who are supposedly untreated is something that is closer to scientific fraud than reasonable analysis.

Altogether these 3 voluntary biases are all pushing to the idea of dangerosity of hydroxychloroquine safest drug as reported on nearly 1 million people (Lane, 2020).

All in all, this is a work that shows that, in this period, it is possible to propose things that do not stand up to any methodological analysis to try to demonstrate that one is right.


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: coronavirus; hcq; hcqtreatment; hydroxychloroquine; nih; raoult
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last
CHARGE by IMPLICATION: VA + NIH SPONSORED CONSPIRACY TO DEFRAUD THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

"something that is closer to scientific fraud than reasonable analysis."
1 posted on 04/22/2020 6:28:32 PM PDT by Steven W.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Steven W.

Great post!


2 posted on 04/22/2020 6:30:39 PM PDT by DesertRhino (Dog is man's best friend, and moslems hate dogs. Add that up. ....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

The (fraudulent) “study” conducted for VA & NIH and published yesterday + parroted by the MSM: https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.04.16.20065920v1.full.pdf


3 posted on 04/22/2020 6:33:21 PM PDT by Steven W.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.

Nice!

See the post right before yours where Dr. Martenson takes them apart too.


4 posted on 04/22/2020 6:33:24 PM PDT by DannyTN
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

Original Abstract (note Author of VA / NIH study had patent pending for COVID-19)


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.


5 posted on 04/22/2020 6:34:59 PM PDT by Steven W.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]


6 posted on 04/22/2020 6:35:57 PM PDT by Steven W.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.

thanks for the post. looks like our gov’t is trying to kill us again.


7 posted on 04/22/2020 6:36:29 PM PDT by dadfly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.

http://www.freerepublic.com/tag/htmlsandbox/


8 posted on 04/22/2020 6:39:40 PM PDT by ButThreeLeftsDo (MAGA!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.
deranged dr michael-fake phd-savage will be proud of this fake study.
9 posted on 04/22/2020 6:43:22 PM PDT by va22030
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.

Yet a VA official acknowledged in an interview that (a) the study was an observational study, not a clinical study and it was very small, (b) all the patients in the study were older and far along in their symptoms, and (c) Hydroxychloroquine is being used by the VA with middle aged patients not far along in their symptoms, and it is successfully mitigating their symptoms.

The deep state VA branch released the “study” just to stay on the Wash. D.C. bureaucrats agenda.


10 posted on 04/22/2020 6:51:15 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

just about everything works better earlier rather than later , in fighting a disease.


11 posted on 04/22/2020 6:59:40 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not Averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

No argument, though some things help much better than other things. Once a Wuhan Virus infection causes illness symptoms, which is more effective, taking more vitamin D3 and Zinc, or Hydfroxychlorquine and Z-pack?


12 posted on 04/22/2020 7:11:49 PM PDT by Wuli
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wuli

if its only in head and throat, taking immune boosters

if it gets into the chest, take antivirals and stop the immune boosters


13 posted on 04/22/2020 7:14:24 PM PDT by Secret Agent Man (Gone Galt; Not Averse to Going Bronson.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.

Great analysis

Laura Ingraham just has an excellent portion of her show on this. She used this same article to refute the VA survey.


14 posted on 04/22/2020 7:22:22 PM PDT by tired&retired (Blessings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Secret Agent Man

I took the anti malaria drug and an antibiotic, but also took antihistamines to stop the fluid; buildup in my lungs.

It worked great.


15 posted on 04/22/2020 7:24:11 PM PDT by tired&retired (Blessings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.

Laura Ingraham also did a segment on the subject of the “HCQ bad” test.

The press is giving advice that would kill people if followed.

AP included.


16 posted on 04/22/2020 7:26:18 PM PDT by Cboldt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.

17 posted on 04/22/2020 7:33:17 PM PDT by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change with out notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.

Outstanding rebuttal!!!! Thank you!


18 posted on 04/22/2020 7:35:00 PM PDT by Basket_of_Deplorables (Unredact the 99 Collyer Report!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Whenifhow; null and void; aragorn; EnigmaticAnomaly; kalee; Kale; AZ .44 MAG; Baynative; bgill; ...

p


19 posted on 04/22/2020 8:31:41 PM PDT by bitt (Hell hath no fury like a scorned patriot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Steven W.

These scientists are clearly anecdotal humans and should not be listened to. They need to report immediately to the nearest scientific re-education camp where they will be programmed with settled science.
Thank you.


20 posted on 04/22/2020 8:56:36 PM PDT by Ouchthatonehurt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-32 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson