Posted on 05/04/2020 9:25:52 AM PDT by RummyChick
cost wont be an issue for some with gileads drug because by the time you would qualify most will have maxed out all their deductibles. But there are probably some insurances that dont have a max for prescriptions and you always have a copay. not sure where the law is on that now
I do know my Obamacare has not waived the deductibles as some insurances have for COVID treatment
Ok those are not professional or publishable references.
Here’s what you need to know and learn.
Every approved drug has a panel of classes of patients to which the drug does not apply.
Every drug, no exceptions.
If classes of patients that are not approved for a drug, if their size is ‘small’ in the sense of a small percentage of the SARS-COV-2 infected population, say for example, < 2%, then that class is known as an orphan population, not my words.
Orphan patient populations, not my words, require orphan drugs, not my words.
Pharma companies, big and small, will shun development of orphan drugs because no $$$ in it, not my opinion, rather it is common industry knowledge
But there is good news, Charitable foundations will fund labs and clinics to develop orphan treatments for orphan patient populations.
But the bad news is the Gate Foundation will not be funding remdesivir and others for orphan conditions because Gates is a psychopath who wants to vaccinate the world with nanochip ‘dots’ and Gilead’s remdesivir is part of his plan.
Bad news is other foundations such as the Clinton Foundation or any Soros organization is not going to fund orphan drug development because such ‘foundations’ are interested in power and control and not interested in ‘for the good of mankind’ endeavors.
Bottom line is remdesivir is not yet ready for primetime with COVID-19 but they have the Gates-Soros Axis that will buy media campaigns to tout remdesivir. So you will hear of it as I have but you will see no data that is statistically sound and significant in their results as I am trained to review and have seen nothing but sales and marketing hype and frankly a liars agenda. Importantly I have seen Gilead and their backers cheating in their review comments against HCQ which tells me all I need to know about who and what they are.
Whereas, with HCQ combination treatment, I have seen plenty of merit in results and more coming from MDs who are honorable and possess a track record of integrity.
The orphan populations that are unable to undergo HCQ combination therapy will need alternatives. But they have viable standard of care treatments NOW. Those of such small populations that contract COVID-19 are not guaranteed remdesivir will work for them nor does Gilead care to develop only for them because there is no money in it,
But as stated above and repeated here, there are foundations that are directed and funded to develop treatments for orphan drugs. MDs that treat such orphan conditions will be the ones calling on such foundations for extending their standard of care to handle their patients who contract COVID-19.
But you should understand that a treatment that can achieve 95% success for 99% of the afflicted population is really really outstanding. Such high success rates designate such treatments as ‘cures’, no question about it, no argument.
Remdesivir was not very effective c/o the triple therapy and it is a very expensive regime. I think the American public are getting played by those in Big Pharmy’s support system like Fauci.
Excuse me, it is NIH and official published statistics that classify your condition as RARE.
And it is pointed out to you that the PHARMA industry is not interested in investing in treatments for RARE conditions.
So that leaves it to charitable foundations with good reputations to obtain funding to extend standard of care to patients like you that might contract COVID-19.
Gilead and its remdesivir don’t care about you. And if they say they do, they are lying. Because their business decisions are guided by profit and your rare condition is not a profit center.
I dont see a YES or NO in your answer
Is it because YOU DO NOT KNOW?????
And therefore..you can’t claim there is no class of people that cant take this drug.
And where are the results for the HCQ trials? If they could publish remdisivir results this fast, and its trial started AFTER HCQ trials, where the heck are they???
Remdesivir results are not a game changer. Especially compared to HCQ. But at $900-1000 Target price, Gileade sure is hyping it. Yeah, free drugs for awhile. Get that name recognition early. Push the docs to prescribe. So it becomes the default in 6 months and they make a killing.
Your question was whether remdesivir was the preferred treatment with patients having thalassemia and my answer was and is no.
I want the names of the ‘frontline’ doctors touting remdesivir you said you were following. You didn’t provide them.
The first one is free. Where have I heard that before?
Oh hell no. You have spent so much time dancing trying to avoid the answer.
here it is:
and btw, I noticed you didnt answer this question as to whether a certain class of people (who already deal with oxidative stress due to the disorder) might need look to another drug to help them with COVID 19
https://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline/archives/2020/04/06/hydroxychloroquine-update-for-april-6
Paul Nicholas Boylan says:
7 April, 2020 at 4:25 pm
Is anyone screening for thalassemia? I am Greek and have thalassemia B. It is easily managed, but all of my doctors over the years have warned me to avoid taking malaria medicates because they are lethal to thalassemia patients. Hydroxychloroquine is a malaria treatment.
It is really interesting how much time you spent trying to bash Gilead’s drug. I wonder your agenda.
If you are a DR like you are trying to imply you should welcome possible treatments
If you work for a competing interest your posts are trash
Not sure what your agenda is...
i look at all these drugs as possibles and hope they find solution before I eventually get Covid 19...where Drs dont even know if it is safe to give to a person with a hemoglobin disorder.
I told you Gilead has no interest in persons with Thalassemia because it’s a RARE disorder
AND
Gilead has demonstrated NADA results in treating anyone with Thalassemia or any other condition.
It could not be more clear.
That’s a significant difference.
WOW...what you are doing is remarkable. It’s like I am watching some propaganda machine.
My question is not about Gilead
And you just will not answer it.
Likely because you have no clue..but whatever the case..keep on spinning your weird PR campaign against Gilead.
Pathettic.
Show me one COVID-19 study, just one, of remdesivir that has been peer reviewed demonstrating a statistically significant treatment effect. You won’t be able to find it because it does not exist.
I have seen some fake news reports of remdesivir quote {”seeming” to show a “modest effect”} and then blowing it up with hyperbole as a ‘breakthrough’. But in terms of science, it’s garbage.
If I saw credible, free of conflict-of-interest reports and publications establishing remdesivir as a cure of or significant mitigating agent against COVID-19, I would be promoting it. But there are no such reports, they do not exist.
And apparently, these so-called MDs you say you follow that support remdesivir, these ghost MDs are hidden, invisible, afraid to come out into the light.
Pathetic.
Okay so keep spinning against Gilead. i get it .
you dont want the drug
NOW
Tell me
YES OR NO
Is Trump’s malaria drug safe for those that have thalessemia in its many forms.
“”It’s way cheaper,””
I heard on FOX $4000 a treatment - cheaper? What’s the cost of the other one?
Clinical benefit is greatest when antiviral treatment is administered early in the illness course. When indicated, antiviral treatment should be started as soon as possible after illness onset and should not be delayed even for a few hours to wait for the results of testing. Ideally, treatment should be initiated within 48 hours of symptom onset. However, antiviral treatment initiated later than 48 hours after illness onset can still be beneficial for some patients.
https://www.infectioncontroltoday.com/drugs/cdc-issues-update-regarding-treatment-patients-influenza-antiviral-medications
The same is valid for Remdesivir.
I heard a rep. of the company saying effectiveness 50% of cases. Not quite sure what he means by “effective”. That’s kind of vague.
I don’t know if they’ve broken down those cases into early, mid or late onset.
50% is better than nothing, but it’s disappointing considering the hype the drug has received.
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.