Professor Raoult Releases Results of New Hydroxychloroquine Treatment Study on 1061 Patients

Why are you selectively quoting posts from a week ago?

 

And those people in those jungles

Do they have a virus induced cardiomyopathy? Is the dose they are taking the same as is required for COVID?

 

I accidentally found myself on Page 1.. no biggy.. answer or don't..

 

More research has been published since then and I, like many others are busy reading through what has been published

 

Here's the deal. A ventilator is a poorly performing modality of treatment on which 80% of the corona patients in NYC who go on one come off of it dead. Ventilators are a last ditch thing and a money sucking thing, certainly not much of an answer to corona.

So if there is anything that shows a hint of promise it has to be trailed hard AND FAST until the trail ends in futility or ends in the real El Dorado. At this time there is no reason to limit the focus on any existing drugs which have any shot at successfully treating corona while attempts are also made to create new drugs. There's a couple of existing drugs now that are looking pretty good. They both are used in cocktails, not solo, when good results are gotten.

I really don't care if it winds up being a cottonmouth venom and owl piss cocktail in a small homeopathic dose if it works and gets to patients FAST. Put the bullwhip to scientists if that's what it takes.

 

Good question.. Do all those that the doctors are prescribing it to have virus induced cardiomyopathy? Umm.. that would be no.. That's a serious condition.

For a person who likes to list their google results, you must assume that you're the only person with access or know-how to use it. Every false claim you make is easily invalidated and repudiated.

Those with virus induced cardiomyopathy are already in the hospital. If the drugs were given earlier, fewer would end up with virus induced cardiomyopathy. And, certainly, your claim that it should only be given in the hospital because of the risk of virus induced cardiomyopathy is proven false.

 

Quit advertising your thread. There are hundreds of other links I could post that say the danger point is at 500ms... if you disagree, then disagree - with supporting links..

 

And would you agree that a global Multicenter trial would be the best? A trial that has numerous drugs enrolled, one that can collate the information across the globe?

Pity the funding was pulled https://www.who.int/emergencies/dis...darity-clinical-trial-for-covid-19-treatments

 

Then by all means post the information but the question remains

Is that an effective dose against COVID 19? Does that dose confer protection?

 

I'm not going to read your long list of links with no quotes or reasons given for me to read each one. I could link the entire encyclopedia britannica and claim you can't respond until you have read my link... If I quote something I give enough to make it worth the reader's time to follow the link. Your list is meaningless and I'm not going to read it all.

If there's something interesting, you quote it.. I'll prove you wrong. That's how we do it.. you say it and I prove you wrong.. It's been done a hundred or so times... you should recognize the pattern by now.

 

What I have noted is an almost endless stream of Ad Hominems and personal attacks

 

That's not the question in the discussion. The question was that you quoted a summary, not the actual study, in what I believe was an attempt to divert from the actual study. The question was that the study you didn't quote was flawed, only 7 people participated beginning to end.. 7 patients.. and it wasn't the random, double-blind, peer reviewed, study that you keep insisting on... unless it serves your political purpose. The question is, one patient was taken off hydroxychloroquine because their QT interval was 460 to 470 and the study authors tried to imply it was dangerously high and due to the hydroxychloroquine.

https://acrabstracts.org/abstract/long-qt-and-hydroxychloroquine-a-poorly-recognised-problem-in-rheumatology-patients/

The abstract above summarizes the change in QT interval of several patients taking a wide range of dosages over an average of over 3 years with an average of 25 ms increase of QT while taking hydroxychloroquine. Some patients even had a reduction in QT interval. Others had increases as high as 143 ms... And yet stayed on the medication for 1.8 years at the time of the study.

These horror stories of variations in QT interval that you and others keep throwing out are a big todo do about nothing.. If there are concerns, those are between the doctor and patient but there's NOTHING to suggest that the doctors are risking lives and that you're here trying to save them.

 

Put me on ignore.

 

I quoted the summary because unlike others I do not want the owners of this board charged with breach of copyright

I LINKED to the full study so people can read the full report at source

And not playing with the shifting goal posts mate

Back to the question

What is the effective dose for COVID 19?

 

Nope. The HCQ and other tests & trials in the USA should be our benchmark. If something good looks promising elsewhere test it here.

Use the extra money the USA didn't piss away globally for tests & trials here.

 

Yes but how do you know if something is working better elsewhere?

But if you think “only USA is good” then go that route, same as you did with the test kits...........that worked out well didn’t it?

 

Copyright, my foot. Editorial commentary is fair use.

And you are still moving the goal posts... What is the effective dose for Wuhan virus is not the question we were asking or discussing at all.. You've thrown in the towel on all the other points because I've proven you wrong on each case. You do this quite often; throw something out and then, when I prove you wrong, you simply ignore it and change the question.

Why in the world would I presume to tell you the effective dose of hydroxychloroquine for the Wuhan virus? I don't claim, even on the Internet, to be a medical professional or to know more than doctors.. If you want to know about dosing, talk to doctors. Or, if you want the doctors to know, I'm sure you'll give them their opinion.

 

We learned about HCQ from the Chiners and the French physicians grapevine.

Testing is catching up, Dr. Fauci says there will be enough tests for phase 1 of the ramp up.

 

But this is what is concerning to the medical profession

A drug is no good if the therapeutic dose is close to or above the toxic dose

BTW

https://ama.com.au/sites/default/files/AMA Fact Files - COVID-19 Pharmacologic Treatment.pdf

A summary of drug treatment from the Federal Vice President of the AMA

 

You are STILL playing “catch up”? Wow!!

 

That's not a true statement at all. People survive toxic levels of a lot of drugs. Toxic levels vary from patient to patient, condition to condition, dose to dose.

Additionally, there are a lot of times a real medical professional would administer a drug that has serious risks - if the risks of not doing it are even greater.. Drugs that have therapeutic doses close to, or even above, toxic doses are very good - in the right case.. cases determined by actual doctors with their patients, not by Internet-medical-professional-wannabees.

 

If physicians can do chemo with a clear conscience they can do high does when warranted with a clear conscience.

 

Oh! You mean the old thing about “the treatment was successful but the patient died”?

Didn’t know that was still a thing since the widespread use of Evidence Based Practice

 

Really??

Please post some validation for that claim

 

Second time I've seen this claim. Odd that no one has provided any confirmation of this ground breaking news. One would think it is just made up, which it is.