Hydoxychlorquinine does not appear to be an answer:

Status
Not open for further replies.

Bobber

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2004
6,584
3,076
✟213,623.00
Faith
Non-Denom
One needs more than anecdotes. People often fools themselves in cases like this. Data is needed. The data does not seem to agree.
Doctor Oz stated tonight on Hannity that this drug's promising news for the condition IS NOT just based on some flimsy anecdote! He's getting across people need to wake up.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Zanting
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Doctor Oz stated tonight on Hannity that this drug's promising news for the condition IS NOT just based on some flimsy anecdote! He's getting across people need to wake up.
Dr. Oz, and FOX News, oh my!!!
 
Upvote 0

Bobber

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2004
6,584
3,076
✟213,623.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Dr. Oz, and FOX News, oh my!!!
My, my, my how about you find out what Dr Oz found out from a Doctor Daniel Wallace, board certified Rheumatologist has the largest lupis practise in the United States in 1985, has right now 2000 patients with lupus the majority of them taking the drug in question, has done over 400 peer reviewed papers, past chairman of the Lupus Foundation of America....um, I think he's pretty credible when it comes to knowing about hydroxychloroquine...I think people better have a look at it. This man is in the KNOW not like those who might think they are. (see from 1908-2616 in the link)

 
  • Winner
Reactions: Zanting
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟298,148.00
Faith
Christian
As stated...it is irresponsible and dangerous to deny the facts that are very much out there...although and also stated...some people will never be satisfied no matter how much evidence has accumulated .

The problem is that the "evidence" is that while HCQ is a useful drug that is effective against malaria and helpful with Lupus, it hasn't been shown in scientific studies to be effective again COVID-19, and there really hasn't been much in the way of scientific studies on that topic.

It is the negative narrative and one that ignores that it as an "unofficial cure" with millions of doses being produced and distributed just for US citizens,not to mention all the other countries that are administering HCQ+ as an effective treatment and which has also been approved by the FDA.

It's been approved for treating Malaria and Lupus, but it's not been approved, nor shown to be effective against COVID-19. The only really positive study from France was based upon only 80 cases, and while only 1 person died in that study, that's all the deaths that we might expect to see if *no treatment at all* were offered to those same 80 individuals. Most of them were "mild" cases which is in fact typical and such cases don't even require hospitalization or anything external to "cure" the virus.

And again 1000's of doctors surveyed from many different countries that have all stated HCQ+ SHOULD be used as a treatment for covid-19.

There's a big difference between believing that a particular drug "should" be available to be tried if the patient so chooses, and knowing with scientific certainly that it's going to make someone better. The problem is that there isn't sufficient evidence yet to "know" it's going to do anything.

But then there are the naysayers pushinng, the no no no it's not effective narrative, with no substantial evidence to support such negative claims whatsoever...spreading fear, anxiety and distress.

I think you have that backwards. The virus spreads fear, anxiety, distress and even death. A *demonstrate cure* would counterbalance that kind of reaction. Unfortunately a "hypothetical" cure isn't going to have that same ability or that same effect. That's where we are right now. It's nobody's fault, it's just where things stand right now.

Not my narrative at all, nor would I ever dash peoples hopes with this false negative narrative about the effectiveness of these meds.

We also run the risk of creating a "false positive" narrative that causes people to have a sense of 'false hope/belief' that there's a cure out there so they act with less caution, only to get themselves infected and they die as a result of a 'false hope/belief'.

I'd be *thrilled* if a dozen or so studies all supported the belief that *any* treatment was effective, but unfortunately nothing like that currently exists.

Melatonin? Stem cells? Researchers step up with unconventional approaches to COVID-19

Even Melatonin has been floated as having positive effects, but again, there's simply no strong 'scientific evidence" to suggest it's an actual "cure" for COVID-19.

I think your basic argument cuts both ways. A false positive is actually more dangerous however because it may cause people to act less responsibly and lead to more deaths. A false negative might unnecessarily prolong fear, but it's not likely to increase the body count. That's probably why most medical professionals are "cautious" about claiming that A) there is any "cure' at all right now, or B) that HCQ is such a cure. There just isn't sufficient scientific evidence to support that assertion, and at least some evidence to refute it.

It's worth *knowing* that it *might* be effective, and offering the individual the *option* to help "test" it's effectiveness, but it's premature to suggest it's a 'done deal'.
 
  • Like
Reactions: whatbogsends
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟298,148.00
Faith
Christian
I would love to see some positive results too, but I have also found that false hopes are often more damaging than no hopes. If anything the answer is most likely to be some sort of vaccine. And I will be first in line if such a vaccine is developed.

An effective vaccine could be 18 months away even if they're fast tracked and one (or more) of them turns out to be effective. In the meantime I think it's worth trying a few other options to see what may or may not be an effective treatment. I think it's "good" that the public is aware of hydroxychloroquine as a "possible" treatment, and it's available to them if they wish to try it.

My concern about 'false hope' is that might lead to less cautious behavior, and result in more infections and more deaths as a result of irresponsible behavior. I think it is best to error on the side of caution, but I can't blame someone who'd at least like to try an experimental treatment of some sort.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: whatbogsends
Upvote 0

loveofourlord

Newbie
Feb 15, 2014
8,118
4,528
✟269,140.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Upvote 0

solid_core

Well-Known Member
Oct 13, 2019
2,695
1,579
Vienna
✟50,919.00
Country
Austria
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Aren't there other promising antiviral drugs?
Here in the EU we are currently talking about two:
- Remdesivir (USA)
- Avigan (Japan)

One of our patient in critical state got Remdesivir treatment and got better, but doctors are not certain if its because of the drug. They are midly optimistic about it, though.
 
Upvote 0

Bobber

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2004
6,584
3,076
✟213,623.00
Faith
Non-Denom
The plural of anecdote is anecdotes, not data.
Doctor Oz said there's no way one can called the evidence anecdotal. He says that is a dishonest representation of what's happening. He said you have a randomized trial from China, you have a large case series of 1000 patients from France. Other doctors have told him they wish there was a greater case trial BUT they're taking it themselves. I'd say that suggest the real feel out there is that this drug IS helping people with corona.
 
Upvote 0

Zanting

not so new
Mar 15, 2012
2,366
464
✟47,296.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Doctor Oz said there's no way one can called the evidence anecdotal. He says that is a dishonest representation of what's happening. He said you have a randomized trial from China, you have a large case series of 1000 patients from France. Other doctors have told him they wish there was a greater case trial BUT they're taking it themselves. I'd say that suggest the real feel out there is that this drug IS helping people with corona.


Yes...HCQ+ is now an accepted treatment in several countries...and it's being used in the US as well, and has been for over 3 weeks now...lots of positive data out there now for HCQ+ use as an early treatment for covid-19. It was anecdotal (which is also real data) 2 weeks ago, but not now.

It seems pretty odd that Govenor Cuomo shut down Dr. Oz's study...well the US isn't the only country doing research in any stretch of the imagination and now that this combo of meds has been in use in many different countries and the positive results for HCQ+ as an early treatment is piling up. it won't be long before it's obvious the negative narrative will be exposed as lies, cover ups, dismissing real time evidence etc.

The other interesting aspect to all of this is that now that 100,s of thousands of people have had and are over the virus...they are immune and have antibodies...yet some keep pushing for a vaccine...anyone who has overcome the virus won't need a vaccine...and HCQ seems to also function well as a preventative treatment. That allows for options for people who opt out of a vaccine...which is also great news.

There is absolutely no doubt that HCQ+ is a very effective early treatment for the virus.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Zanting

not so new
Mar 15, 2012
2,366
464
✟47,296.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
The problem is that the "evidence" is that while HCQ is a useful drug that is effective against malaria and helpful with Lupus, it hasn't been shown in scientific studies to be effective again COVID-19, and there really hasn't been much in the way of scientific studies on that topic.



It's been approved for treating Malaria and Lupus, but it's not been approved, nor shown to be effective against COVID-19. The only really positive study from France was based upon only 80 cases, and while only 1 person died in that study, that's all the deaths that we might expect to see if *no treatment at all* were offered to those same 80 individuals. Most of them were "mild" cases which is in fact typical and such cases don't even require hospitalization or anything external to "cure" the virus.



There's a big difference between believing that a particular drug "should" be available to be tried if the patient so chooses, and knowing with scientific certainly that it's going to make someone better. The problem is that there isn't sufficient evidence yet to "know" it's going to do anything.



I think you have that backwards. The virus spreads fear, anxiety, distress and even death. A *demonstrate cure* would counterbalance that kind of reaction. Unfortunately a "hypothetical" cure isn't going to have that same ability or that same effect. That's where we are right now. It's nobody's fault, it's just where things stand right now.



We also run the risk of creating a "false positive" narrative that causes people to have a sense of 'false hope/belief' that there's a cure out there so they act with less caution, only to get themselves infected and they die as a result of a 'false hope/belief'.

I'd be *thrilled* if a dozen or so studies all supported the belief that *any* treatment was effective, but unfortunately nothing like that currently exists.

Melatonin? Stem cells? Researchers step up with unconventional approaches to COVID-19

Even Melatonin has been floated as having positive effects, but again, there's simply no strong 'scientific evidence" to suggest it's an actual "cure" for COVID-19.

I think your basic argument cuts both ways. A false positive is actually more dangerous however because it may cause people to act less responsibly and lead to more deaths. A false negative might unnecessarily prolong fear, but it's not likely to increase the body count. That's probably why most medical professionals are "cautious" about claiming that A) there is any "cure' at all right now, or B) that HCQ is such a cure. There just isn't sufficient scientific evidence to support that assertion, and at least some evidence to refute it.

It's worth *knowing* that it *might* be effective, and offering the individual the *option* to help "test" it's effectiveness, but it's premature to suggest it's a 'done deal'.

I'm not stopping you...or anyone else from pushing the negative narrative...that's your's and their choice.

I don't want the responsibilty of denying a PROVEN cure and letting people die because of it. Negative narrative pushers can shoulder that responsibility.

And yes, PROVEN...as defined by the scientific method...accumulative consistent evidence equals proof...and defined by 1000's of doctors around the world as an effective early treatment for the covid-19.
 
Upvote 0

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
I'm not stopping you...or anyone else from pushing the negative narrative...that's your's and their choice.

I don't want the responsibilty of denying a PROVEN cure and letting people die because of it. Negative narrative pushers can shoulder that responsibility.

And yes, PROVEN...as defined by the scientific method...accumulative consistent evidence equals proof...and defined by 1000's of doctors around the world as an effective early treatment for the covid-19.
It is incorrect to call an honest assessment a "negative narrative". If you could support your claims you would not need to name call.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: KCfromNC
Upvote 0

Zanting

not so new
Mar 15, 2012
2,366
464
✟47,296.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
It is incorrect to call an honest assessment a "negative narrative". If you could support your claims you would not need to name call.


Honest assessment decrying the use of HCQ...haven't seen an honest one yet...nor do I expect to...there's far to much supporting evidence contradicting the negative narrative...and eventually the MSM will have to acknowledge it as the proof becomes to large ro sweep under the rug...with three weeks into this treatment, the evidence is already huge in support of HCQ+ as an early treatment for the virus.

So you keep saying...and you can go ahead and keep on saying there is no evidence...just like the rest of those promoting the negative narrative...and you can keep trying to make it personal by calling it "my claim" which of course is entirely inaccurate as it's the claim and concensus of doctors from many different countries...it won't the effectiveness and success of HCQ+ go away...and continue accumulating positive results.

The negative narrative out there is cheering on this disater, pushing for a prolonged shutdown, and is attempting to squelch the positive effects of HCQ+.

Now why would that be???

You go right ahead and accept responsibiltiy of promoting the negative narrative, that's you choice.
 
Upvote 0

Zanting

not so new
Mar 15, 2012
2,366
464
✟47,296.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
It is incorrect to call an honest assessment a "negative narrative". If you could support your claims you would not need to name call.

Claims are supported and ignored...over and over again...so you can keep making that claim and attempt to make it about "my claims"...doesn't alter the accumulating data coming in every day on the positive effects of early HCQ+ treatment.

As stated...you go right ahead and take on the responsibility of pushing the negative narrative...that;s your choice.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

loveofourlord

Newbie
Feb 15, 2014
8,118
4,528
✟269,140.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Doctor Oz said there's no way one can called the evidence anecdotal. He says that is a dishonest representation of what's happening. He said you have a randomized trial from China, you have a large case series of 1000 patients from France. Other doctors have told him they wish there was a greater case trial BUT they're taking it themselves. I'd say that suggest the real feel out there is that this drug IS helping people with corona.

dr oz is a quack, hardly the best source for information, the guy believes in a ton of quackery, like homeopathy and energy healing.
 
Upvote 0

Michael

Contributor
Supporter
Feb 5, 2002
25,145
1,721
Mt. Shasta, California
Visit site
✟298,148.00
Faith
Christian
I'm not stopping you...or anyone else from pushing the negative narrative...that's your's and their choice.

I don't want the responsibilty of denying a PROVEN cure and letting people die because of it. Negative narrative pushers can shoulder that responsibility.

And yes, PROVEN...as defined by the scientific method...accumulative consistent evidence equals proof...and defined by 1000's of doctors around the world as an effective early treatment for the covid-19.

I'm not pushing a 'negative' narrative, I'm pushing a neutral narrative toward a lot of possible ways to treat COVID-19 until or unless I see strong statistical evidence to support the method. Here's another possibility by the way:

A Plausible "Penny" Costing Effective Treatment for Corona Virus - Ozone Therapy

I'm not suggesting that there is strong evidence to support ozone therapy either, but by your logic I'm pushing a negative narrative simply for suggesting that *I don't know* if it's a valid treatment for COVID-19.

You're essentially arguing a false dichotomy fallacy. It's not an either/or proposition at this point because there is a third category of "I don't know" if it's effective, not just a positive or negative position..
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Pommer
Upvote 0

Zanting

not so new
Mar 15, 2012
2,366
464
✟47,296.00
Country
Canada
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
I'm not pushing a 'negative' narrative, I'm pushing a neutral narrative toward a lot of possible ways to treat COVID-19 until or unless I see strong statistical evidence to support the method. Here's another possibility by the way:

A Plausible "Penny" Costing Effective Treatment for Corona Virus - Ozone Therapy

I'm not suggesting that there is strong evidence to support ozone therapy either, but by your logic I'm pushing a negative narrative simply for suggesting that *I don't know* if it's a valid treatment for COVID-19.

You're essentially arguing a false dichotomy fallacy. It's not an either/or proposition at this point because there is a third category of "I don't know" if it's effective, not just a positive or negative position..

There is absolutely nothing neutral about the positive results of early HCQ+ treatment...not in Spain, Italy, France and Brazil...all using HCQ+ on patients and reporting the positive results...and they highly support and recommend HCQ+ as an effective treatment.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Subduction Zone

Regular Member
Dec 17, 2012
32,628
12,068
✟230,461.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Honest assessment decrying the use of HCQ...haven't seen an honest one yet...nor do I expect to...there's far to much supporting evidence contradicting the negative narrative...and eventually the MSM will have to acknowledge it as the proof becomes to large ro sweep under the rug...with three weeks into this treatment, the evidence is already huge in support of HCQ+ as an early treatment for the virus.

So you keep saying...and you can go ahead and keep on saying there is no evidence...just like the rest of those promoting the negative narrative...and you can keep trying to make it personal by calling it "my claim" which of course is entirely inaccurate as it's the claim and concensus of doctors from many different countries...it won't the effectiveness and success of HCQ+ go away...and continue accumulating positive results.

The negative narrative out there is cheering on this disater, pushing for a prolonged shutdown, and is attempting to squelch the positive effects of HCQ+.

Now why would that be???

You go right ahead and accept responsibiltiy of promoting the negative narrative, that's you choice.
You are not accurately describing those arguing against you or their position.

And you have not supported any of your claims. Surely you can do better than this.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.