Hydoxychlorquinine does not appear to be an answer:

[Michael]

It's very well known that there are two narratives about the use of HCQ+...

No, there are three possible narratives, positive, negative and "I don't know". You refuse to allow for the third option however, which is frankly just unfair. I don't hold a position of knowledge on the topic of the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of HCQ+ treatments on COVID-19. I simply do not know.

and that's too bad because lives are at stake and those who keep claiming the evidence is anecdotal and unsupported are touting that negative narrative. All you have to do is watch MSM.

I'm afraid that I simply don't watch a lot of news on TV these days because it's rather depressing IMO. I have however read exactly three published studies on HCQ+ experiments, but they produced conflicting results so the jury is still out IMO.

And no one is handing this drug out willy nilly...most people recover at home without treatment...so that's a ridiculous notion entirely. Furthermore, over 1 million doses have been produced, with more being produced daily, and are being distributed for use of those in need in the US. That's all being done because of anecdotal evidence...not on your life...it's because people being treated are getting better...over and over again...in many countries. Other countries have been using it for weeks now.

The problem with your logic is that you're ignoring the fact that it's possible that the drug is being administered because it *might* be effective, and trying something might be better than just letting the die without trying anything.

And indeed, there are at least 15 other treatments being tested and tried out there and the concensus from 1000's of doctors surveyed is that HCQ+ is the most effective to date.

Based on which study? I've asked you to produce studies from Brazil, Spain, Italy , etc, but you've yet to do so. Why not?

The problem from my perspective is that you're promoting a "knowledge position' (it's effective), and you're falsely asserting that the only alternative is another 'knowledge position" (it's ineffective) and you're not allowing for an honest "I don't know yet" to even exist! That's not fair. I don't pretend to know one way or another yet, and most doctors that I know are not making such a claim either.

You however are claiming to represent some sort of consensus in the medical community, but when I asked you to support that assertion, you haven't produced the studies I asked for. Why not?

 

[Mountainmanbob]

Malaria Drug Helps Virus Patients Improve, in Small Study

 

[Michael]

Ethyl alcohol kills the virus. I would suggest that as a cure.

Nah, but I'd try an Everclear treatment method.

 

[Michael]

Malaria Drug Helps Virus Patients Improve, in Small Study

That seems like a good study, albeit still a small sample size (62), 31 control, 31 with HCQ treatment.

Efficacy of hydroxychloroquine in patients with COVID-19: results of a randomized clinical trial

Conclusion
Despite our small number of cases, the potential of HCQ in the treatment of COVID-19 has been partially confirmed. Considering that there is no better option at present, it is a promising practice to apply HCQ to COVID-19 under reasonable management. However, Large-scale clinical and basic research is still needed to clarify its specific mechanism and to continuously optimize the treatment plan.

They seem to qualify their (positive) results by pointing out that there's not a better treatment at present, and they support a large-scale study to confirm their results. That's promising evidence of course, but not conclusive.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nah, but I'd try an Everclear treatment method.

That is part of the ethyl alcohol family. I prefer the Don Julio treatment myself.

Of course alcohol is an example of why it is so hard to kill viruses. Long before one kills viruses by consuming alcohol the host dies. The greatest promise appears to be in drugs that affect the receptors of the virus. And hopefully not the receptors of cells.

 

[rjs330]

Just another anecdotal statement about the drug.

Detroit rep says hydroxychloroquine, Trump helped save her life amid COVID-19 fight

 

[blackribbon]

I got tired of reading all the posts. This drug combination is given to almost every patient when they are admitted to our hospital for "rule out" Covid. These sick enough to require hospitalization and nursing care. We discharge on a regular basis...people well enough to finish healing at home. I have also cared for one of the patients who had been on a vent for 2 weeks. He received a different anti-malaria medication. The people dying on my unit (not ICU) are those who are frail elderly who have orders for no intubation. They would be high risk for almost any respiratory virus...so Covid is just the virus that does it.

There is now research that this virus may really be more involved in the way the body carries oxygen through the body than on the lungs themselves. The anti-malarial meds may be working by dealing with a problem with the heme which allows oxygen to attach to the red blood cell. It would also explain why certain blood tests serve as a marker of who is likely to test positive.

There will be plenty of patients who will have had this therapy to analyze after this starts to die down. I do believe it is only being used by the hospitalized patients right now. We have to use narcotic rules (counting every pill when we take one out) on hydoxychlorquinine when take on med out to give to a patient. The meds are being used and the supply is being monitored closely.

 

[Zanting]

No, there are three possible narratives, positive, negative and "I don't know". You refuse to allow for the third option however, which is frankly just unfair. I don't hold a position of knowledge on the topic of the effectiveness, or lack thereof, of HCQ+ treatments on COVID-19. I simply do not know.



I'm afraid that I simply don't watch a lot of news on TV these days because it's rather depressing IMO. I have however read exactly three published studies on HCQ+ experiments, but they produced conflicting results so the jury is still out IMO.



The problem with your logic is that you're ignoring the fact that it's possible that the drug is being administered because it *might* be effective, and trying something might be better than just letting the die without trying anything.



Based on which study? I've asked you to produce studies from Brazil, Spain, Italy , etc, but you've yet to do so. Why not?

The problem from my perspective is that you're promoting a "knowledge position' (it's effective), and you're falsely asserting that the only alternative is another 'knowledge position" (it's ineffective) and you're not allowing for an honest "I don't know yet" to even exist! That's not fair. I don't pretend to know one way or another yet, and most doctors that I know are not making such a claim either.

You however are claiming to represent some sort of consensus in the medical community, but when I asked you to support that assertion, you haven't produced the studies I asked for. Why not?

Yes there are two narratives being promoted in the media...

It's all in the public realm...coming from all different countries and sources...I have posted 2 great places to start on this very thread...albeit it's old news now but, I'm not your research assistent...and don't intend to be unless you want to pay me substantially to do so...do your own research...you may be amazed at what you learn.

 

[Michael]

Yes there are two narratives being promoted in the media...

Since when has the media ever been responsible for validating the science behind any specific idea, medical or otherwise? My opinions have nothing to do with media narratives. They tend to be shaped by scientific literature.

It's all in the public realm...coming from all different countries and sources...I have posted 2 great places to start on this very thread...albeit it's old news now but, I'm not your research assistent...and don't intend to be unless you want to pay me substantially to do so...do your own research...you may be amazed at what you learn.

What I've learned is that there is a lot of public "hope" for many different drugs and various treatments, and very little in terms of the actual scientific literature. The scientific literature tends to be quite limited at the moment, but that's to be expected.

Like I said, I don't mind experimental testing on possible treatments, but I think it's way too soon to suggest that there's a known "cure" that is already proven to be effective and reliable, otherwise we wouldn't still be seeing so many deaths, and there would be plenty of scientific literature to describe the treatment(s).

I'm optimistic that HCQ *might* help some patients, and it might eventually be shown to be a valid cure in some instances, but like I said, at the moment I just don't know one way or the other.

The "other narrative" you seem to be ignoring is the 'I don't know yet" narrative.

 

[Michael]

That is part of the ethyl alcohol family. I prefer the Don Julio treatment myself.

Ah, I guess I was thinking about ethanol when you mentioned ethyl alcohol, but hey, if we're experimenting with possible treatments, I've got no problem with testing various levels of alcohol.

Of course alcohol is an example of why it is so hard to kill viruses. Long before one kills viruses by consuming alcohol the host dies.

Kill joy. Did you really have to rain on my parade?

The greatest promise appears to be in drugs that affect the receptors of the virus. And hopefully not the receptors of cells.

I agree. I'm just grateful that I live in a world that is pretty tech savvy, particularly as it relates to medicine and drug and vaccination development. There's definitely hope.

 

[Michael]

I got tired of reading all the posts. This drug combination is given to almost every patient when they are admitted to our hospital for "rule out" Covid. These sick enough to require hospitalization and nursing care. We discharge on a regular basis...people well enough to finish healing at home. I have also cared for one of the patients who had been on a vent for 2 weeks. He received a different anti-malaria medication. The people dying on my unit (not ICU) are those who are frail elderly who have orders for no intubation. They would be high risk for almost any respiratory virus...so Covid is just the virus that does it.

There is now research that this virus may really be more involved in the way the body carries oxygen through the body than on the lungs themselves. The anti-malarial meds may be working by dealing with a problem with the heme which allows oxygen to attach to the red blood cell. It would also explain why certain blood tests serve as a marker of who is likely to test positive.

There will be plenty of patients who will have had this therapy to analyze after this starts to die down. I do believe it is only being used by the hospitalized patients right now. We have to use narcotic rules (counting every pill when we take one out) on hydoxychlorquinine when take on med out to give to a patient. The meds are being used and the supply is being monitored closely.

Thanks for you service by the way.

I heard recently that COVID-19 seems to produce a lot of clotting in various patients, possibly resulting in strokes and such. Has that been your experience as well?

 

[Bobber]

He said it had "a real chance to be one of the biggest game changers in the history of medicine", which is a bit more than saying that it's promising.

So what's the difference! He said it had a good chance and 6000 doctors are already confirming it's the most beneficial drug they've used. And please don't go down the road and say this person died or that one......it may not work for every single person as is true for all medicines.

 

[Mountainmanbob]

I heard recently that COVID-19 seems to produce a lot of clotting in various patients, possibly resulting in strokes and such. Has that been your experience as well?

I wonder how people on blood thinners are doing?
M-Bob

 

[sfs]

So what's the difference!

One was accurate, one wasn't.

6000 doctors are already confirming it's the most beneficial drug they've used

Not exactly. 37% of some number of doctors -- whatever fraction of the 6200 surveyed have actually treated COVID patients -- said it was the most effective. It's not like it has a lot of competition at the moment. I'd be very interested in knowing how effective they think it is. It's not like I want it not to work -- I was expressing hope here a month ago that it would. I just like to have evidence.

 

[Pommer]

Doctor Oz said

This is all I need.
TV doctors aren’t very good doctors, that’s how they end up on TV!

 

[Mountainmanbob]

This is all I need.
TV doctors aren’t very good doctors, that’s how they end up on TV!

Not really but,
I guess some wish to believe that.

These guys seem pretty sharp.
But, I don't watch them.

Video clips, celebrity interviews and health news, plus healthy recipes, giveaways, and helpful tips from the Emmy Award-Winning

 

[blackribbon]

Thanks for you service by the way.

I heard recently that COVID-19 seems to produce a lot of clotting in various patients, possibly resulting in strokes and such. Has that been your experience as well?

I haven't seen that (or read about that) but most patients in the hospital (at all times) are put on prophylactic blood thinner because of their higher risk of blood clots while being in situations requiring hospitalization. My floor is a telemetry floor so we get a lot of cardiac patients who are already on blood thinners.

 

[blackribbon]

Not really but,
I guess some wish to believe that.

These guys seem pretty sharp.
But, I don't watch them.

Video clips, celebrity interviews and health news, plus healthy recipes, giveaways, and helpful tips from the Emmy Award-Winning

They are entertaining...but not the best doctors. The exception is the ones who do reports for the news stations and working at the hospitals is their job.

 

[Zanting]

Since when has the media ever been responsible for validating the science behind any specific idea, medical or otherwise? My opinions have nothing to do with media narratives. They tend to be shaped by scientific literature.



What I've learned is that there is a lot of public "hope" for many different drugs and various treatments, and very little in terms of the actual scientific literature. The scientific literature tends to be quite limited at the moment, but that's to be expected.

Like I said, I don't mind experimental testing on possible treatments, but I think it's way too soon to suggest that there's a known "cure" that is already proven to be effective and reliable, otherwise we wouldn't still be seeing so many deaths, and there would be plenty of scientific literature to describe the treatment(s).

I'm optimistic that HCQ *might* help some patients, and it might eventually be shown to be a valid cure in some instances, but like I said, at the moment I just don't know one way or the other.

The "other narrative" you seem to be ignoring is the 'I don't know yet" narrative.

News once upon a time...reported facts...journalists today are snuffed out when they research truth and bring forward facts. Just check out operation mockingbird that began around the Kennedy era and is still in effect today...check it out.

Yes there is hope WHEN you have an effective treatment...that gets shut up by the negative narrative currently being touted by the MSM and their loyal followers.

It's not safe to report the truth about anything these days...dangerous days for an honest journalist.

If you really want to know and hear from the experts...here are 2 to get you (or anyone else interested )started... Dr. Daniel Wallace , a well renowned and highly credentialed Lupus specialist based in the US, and Didier Raolt an infectious disease specialist based out of France...and that's just a start.

In my discussions about other countries like Spain, Italy, France and Brazil to name a few...some have been using HCQ+ since the virus broke out in their country, some a little later (noting that China has been using HCQ for a long time to treat viruses) and some that started 3 weeks ago more or less (given the positive results coming from other parts of the world). These countries are all using HCQ+ to treat this virus. Each and every person treated with HCQ outside of a study, is a case study and testament unto themselves and as stated...that's alot of data and all these countries are working together and accumulating a mass data set of these positive results. But you don't have to wait...they are sharing their results among themselves and online.

This is when and why the evidence moves out of the realm of anecdotal and becomes proof. Proof of an effective early treatment for covid-19. At this point, (actually well before this point) to claim it's anecdotal is totally inaccurate, irresponsible and dangerous when referring to a life saving treatment...especially cosidering these drugs have been safely used for decades with very minimal side effects that are also well known and in most cases, are rare and never so serious that anyone required hospitalization.

And yes...you keep saying you don't know...you're on the neutral fence...which I have indeed acknowledged...but that doesn't alter the fact that there are two narratives out there. For people who don't know how to analyze scientic papers, they have no idea what to look for to be able to claim a study has been properly conducted to produce the conclusion or conclusions they publish. So most people, the majority, rely on media sources to summarize that data for them. But if you can't trust the media to report on the data accurately as the MSM is currently doing by downplaying, misrepresenting the results, and in some cases they have outright lied about the data, and to no ones surprise...tried to spin this around like it has something to do with the President which makes no sense at all. Many people don't know what to think or believe...while others simply mimic what they've heard on the news like it's "the God's honest truth" without question.

I learned many years ago that you have to do your own digging and research to get to the facts and the truth of anything...and that takes time.

And I will repeat...promoting the MSM negative narrative regarding about this life saving treatment is dangerous and irresponsible.

 

[Michael]

News once upon a time...reported facts...journalists today are snuffed out when they research truth and bring forward facts. Just check out operation mockingbird that began around the Kennedy era and is still in effect today...check it out.

Do you really buy into every conspiracy theory that comes along? Yellow journalism has been alive and well since long before I was even in high school and it's not really changed that dramatically over the decades. What has changed in journalism during my lifetime is a consolidation of power and politicization of the industry since the creation of a 24/7 version of Foxnews. Now we have "Republican" news outlets (Fox) and "Democratic" news outlets (MSNBC). It's always been driven by sensationalism, it's just become more political over time.

I certainly wouldn't try to determine scientific truth based on the news. That's the role of scientific publications and scientific literature.

Yes there is hope WHEN you have an effective treatment...that gets shut up by the negative narrative currently being touted by the MSM and their loyal followers.

I just got through pointing out to you that such narratives have nothing to do with my beliefs.

It's not safe to report the truth about anything these days...dangerous days for an honest journalist.

This just sounds like conspiracy theories running amuck from my perspective.

The basic problem with your "positive narrative assertions" is that the deaths keep piling up even as the use of such drugs continues to increase. If we were seeing *decreases* in deaths over time, your "positive narrative" wouldn't sound politicized. As it stands however, you're sounding remarkably like someone ranting on Foxnews.